Higher Education and Research English — COMPLETE AI PRACTICE PROMPTS

Every block is a finished prompt. Copy one entire block between START PROMPT and END PROMPT into a new chat in your preferred AI. No prompt-writing is required. Use fictional or anonymized details when the exercise asks for your own response.

Lesson 01 · Research Questions and Study Design | Build vocabulary and collocations

START PROMPT
TASK: Vocabulary in use
1. Choose four useful terms from the reference. For each, give a plain-English meaning in this field, two natural word combinations (collocations), one realistic example and a likely misuse or contrast. Keep the examples consistent with the reference and avoid jargon that does not fit this occupation.
2. Add four related terms that would be useful in a different common situation in the same field. Label these as suggested extensions, explain how they connect to the work, and flag regional or organizational variation where relevant. Do not pad the list with synonyms nobody would use at work.
3. Start a retrieval round: give one short workplace sentence with a gap and a clear clue. Ask me to supply the best term and explain my choice. Stop and wait; do not reveal the answer or a completed sentence yet. Accept another term if its meaning and collocation work.
4. After my attempt, explain one useful distinction and ask me to write my own sentence. Wait, correct a genuine meaning or usage problem, then give the next retrieval question. Work through four questions one at a time.
5. Finish with a short handoff or message task using three terms, followed by two recall questions I can save for another day. Do not pretend to schedule a reminder.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 01: Research Questions and Study Design
Original fictional case: A research proposal asks whether a program "works" without specifying the outcome or population.
Language workshop: Ask a precise question
Communication goal: Clarify missing information before responding.
Language guidance: Name the exact word, fact, or requirement you need clarified. Ask one focused question at a time. Repeat your understanding and give the other person a chance to correct it.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): When you say ..., do you mean ...? / Could you clarify which ...? / So, my understanding is ... . Is that right?
Vocabulary: research question: The specific question a study is designed to investigate. / hypothesis: A proposed explanation or prediction that can be examined using evidence. / methodology: The methods and reasoning used to conduct a study or analysis. / limitation: A condition that restricts what evidence, work, or a conclusion can establish.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to know exactly what information is missing. Give one answer only after your partner asks a focused question; then ask them to confirm their understanding.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person uses an ambiguous word such as 'ready', 'approved', or 'urgent'. Clarify it before continuing.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: What outcome would count as improvement, for whom, and over what period? A clearer research question will help us choose an appropriate design and describe its limits.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 01 · Research Questions and Study Design | Practice grammar in context

START PROMPT
TASK: Grammar that changes the meaning
1. For a lesson, use its language workshop as the focus. For a dialogue, quote one actual sentence and select one useful grammar feature from it, such as question word order, tense, modality, conditionals or clause linking. Explain in no more than 90 words how this feature helps the speakers do their work. Keep the grammar target narrow.
2. Give two short contrasting sentences using this workplace context. Explain the difference in time, certainty, condition or politeness. Label invented examples and preserve the distinction between possible, planned and confirmed events. Describe context-dependent choices as choices, not universal rules.
3. Give me one editing or sentence-building task using a known case fact. Do not copy the supplied editing example or reveal its answer. Ask me to explain my intended meaning. Stop and wait.
4. After I answer, quote my wording, identify at most two issues, and give a brief explanation and one hint. Ask me to revise before offering a full corrected version. Then accept any accurate, natural alternative that serves the purpose.
5. Continue with two new tasks, one at a time: first guided, then an original response without a sentence frame. End with a two-sentence workplace message using the target feature and a compact self-check. Do not replace this sequence with a worksheet and answer key.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 01: Research Questions and Study Design
Original fictional case: A research proposal asks whether a program "works" without specifying the outcome or population.
Language workshop: Ask a precise question
Communication goal: Clarify missing information before responding.
Language guidance: Name the exact word, fact, or requirement you need clarified. Ask one focused question at a time. Repeat your understanding and give the other person a chance to correct it.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): When you say ..., do you mean ...? / Could you clarify which ...? / So, my understanding is ... . Is that right?
Vocabulary: research question: The specific question a study is designed to investigate. / hypothesis: A proposed explanation or prediction that can be examined using evidence. / methodology: The methods and reasoning used to conduct a study or analysis. / limitation: A condition that restricts what evidence, work, or a conclusion can establish.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to know exactly what information is missing. Give one answer only after your partner asks a focused question; then ask them to confirm their understanding.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person uses an ambiguous word such as 'ready', 'approved', or 'urgent'. Clarify it before continuing.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: What outcome would count as improvement, for whom, and over what period? A clearer research question will help us choose an appropriate design and describe its limits.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 01 · Research Questions and Study Design | Rehearse with an AI colleague

START PROMPT
TASK: Interactive workplace role-play
1. Use the supplied case or dialogue as the starting situation. Give a two-sentence briefing and offer two relevant professional roles for me to choose from. For a supplied dialogue, use its actual roles. Ask which role I want, then stop and wait. Do not write my replies.
2. After I choose, identify who you will play and the immediate communication goal. Play the other professional; where a meeting requires a third person, label each of your speakers clearly. Start with one natural workplace turn and wait for my reply. Keep most turns to one to three sentences and ask no more than one question at a time.
3. Let the exchange develop across six to ten learner turns, or end earlier if I type "feedback". Respond to what I actually say. Include a plausible clarification, disagreement or tradeoff without silently changing the starting facts. Mark any added constraint as a fictional second-round variation. Do not resolve approvals, evidence or commitments that remain uncertain.
4. Stay in role during the exchange. If my meaning is unclear, ask for clarification naturally. Give a hint only if I ask or cannot proceed. Do not deliver a model conversation in advance.
5. At the debrief, quote two of my phrases: one successful choice and one worth improving. Check factual accuracy, language, register and whether the next step was clear. Give up to three focused suggestions. Ask me to retry the weakest turn; wait. Only then offer an alternative wording and a harder replay.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 01: Research Questions and Study Design
Original fictional case: A research proposal asks whether a program "works" without specifying the outcome or population.
Language workshop: Ask a precise question
Communication goal: Clarify missing information before responding.
Language guidance: Name the exact word, fact, or requirement you need clarified. Ask one focused question at a time. Repeat your understanding and give the other person a chance to correct it.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): When you say ..., do you mean ...? / Could you clarify which ...? / So, my understanding is ... . Is that right?
Vocabulary: research question: The specific question a study is designed to investigate. / hypothesis: A proposed explanation or prediction that can be examined using evidence. / methodology: The methods and reasoning used to conduct a study or analysis. / limitation: A condition that restricts what evidence, work, or a conclusion can establish.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to know exactly what information is missing. Give one answer only after your partner asks a focused question; then ask them to confirm their understanding.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person uses an ambiguous word such as 'ready', 'approved', or 'urgent'. Clarify it before continuing.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: What outcome would count as improvement, for whom, and over what period? A clearer research question will help us choose an appropriate design and describe its limits.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 01 · Research Questions and Study Design | Create more scenario dialogues

START PROMPT
TASK: Extend the conversation library
1. Propose six distinct, common scenarios in this field beyond the supplied case or script. For each, name the setting, two or more professional roles, the communication problem and one useful terminology focus. Include routine coordination, clarification, a complication, disagreement, handoff and follow-up where relevant. Choose scenarios that fit this profession, rather than forcing unsuitable situations into it.
2. Ask me to choose one scenario, or request all six in sequence. Stop and wait. Do not write all the scripts before I choose.
3. For the selected scenario, write an original fictional dialogue of 12-18 substantial speaking turns between two or three professionals. Name each role, establish an actual work problem, and let the exchange progress through questions, clarification, competing constraints and a credible next step or explicitly unresolved issue. Use the occupation's natural nomenclature and register. Avoid an interview between a teacher and a learner, generic small talk, and inserting a glossary definition into every reply. Explain specialist terms outside the dialogue instead.
4. After the script, explain five useful expressions in context, identify two grammar or register choices and ask three questions about the speakers' reasoning. Withhold the answers until I attempt them. Add one role-switch challenge.
5. Before presenting a script, check names, numbers, chronology, roles and terminology for consistency. Label invented facts and acknowledge uncertain specialist usage. If I requested all six, deliver one complete script at a time and wait for "next". Make each scenario materially different.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 01: Research Questions and Study Design
Original fictional case: A research proposal asks whether a program "works" without specifying the outcome or population.
Language workshop: Ask a precise question
Communication goal: Clarify missing information before responding.
Language guidance: Name the exact word, fact, or requirement you need clarified. Ask one focused question at a time. Repeat your understanding and give the other person a chance to correct it.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): When you say ..., do you mean ...? / Could you clarify which ...? / So, my understanding is ... . Is that right?
Vocabulary: research question: The specific question a study is designed to investigate. / hypothesis: A proposed explanation or prediction that can be examined using evidence. / methodology: The methods and reasoning used to conduct a study or analysis. / limitation: A condition that restricts what evidence, work, or a conclusion can establish.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to know exactly what information is missing. Give one answer only after your partner asks a focused question; then ask them to confirm their understanding.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person uses an ambiguous word such as 'ready', 'approved', or 'urgent'. Clarify it before continuing.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: What outcome would count as improvement, for whom, and over what period? A clearer research question will help us choose an appropriate design and describe its limits.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 01 · Research Questions and Study Design | Get feedback on a draft

START PROMPT
TASK: Coach my workplace writing
1. Ask me to paste my own fictional or anonymized draft and identify its reader and purpose. If the reference gives a writing task, mention that task as the default. If it is a dialogue, suggest a brief follow-up message that records its outcome and open questions. Stop and wait. Do not write the message for me first.
2. Once I supply the draft, check it against the reference. If an ambiguity changes the meaning, ask one focused question before rewriting. Do not assume that the draft is correct evidence for a new deadline, approval, diagnosis, cost or commitment.
3. Give feedback in three parts: one effective phrase with a reason; up to three priority improvements, quoting my words; and one short revision task for me. Prioritize incorrect facts or unclear action before minor grammar. For each language correction, explain why it matters to this reader. Label optional stylistic alternatives separately and preserve my level of certainty and intended politeness.
4. Stop and wait for my revision. Then compare the two attempts, identify an improvement and offer one edited version that preserves my voice and purpose. Keep the requested length; if none is specified, use 70-110 words. Explain any meaningful change rather than silently making the message stronger or more certain.
5. Close with one phrase worth reusing and a short transfer task for a different fictional reader. Wait for my attempt before providing another model.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 01: Research Questions and Study Design
Original fictional case: A research proposal asks whether a program "works" without specifying the outcome or population.
Language workshop: Ask a precise question
Communication goal: Clarify missing information before responding.
Language guidance: Name the exact word, fact, or requirement you need clarified. Ask one focused question at a time. Repeat your understanding and give the other person a chance to correct it.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): When you say ..., do you mean ...? / Could you clarify which ...? / So, my understanding is ... . Is that right?
Vocabulary: research question: The specific question a study is designed to investigate. / hypothesis: A proposed explanation or prediction that can be examined using evidence. / methodology: The methods and reasoning used to conduct a study or analysis. / limitation: A condition that restricts what evidence, work, or a conclusion can establish.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to know exactly what information is missing. Give one answer only after your partner asks a focused question; then ask them to confirm their understanding.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person uses an ambiguous word such as 'ready', 'approved', or 'urgent'. Clarify it before continuing.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: What outcome would count as improvement, for whom, and over what period? A clearer research question will help us choose an appropriate design and describe its limits.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 01 · Research Questions and Study Design | Adjust tone and register

START PROMPT
TASK: Match the language to the listener
1. Choose a short message or utterance from the reference and quote it exactly. Identify its purpose and likely audience. Ask me to choose a new audience: a close colleague, a decision-maker, or an external reader who may not know the jargon. Stop and wait.
2. Ask me to adapt that message for the chosen reader, keeping its facts and degree of certainty unchanged. Offer a short frame only if I request help. Wait for my attempt before showing alternatives.
3. Discuss at most three choices in my version: directness, specialist vocabulary and interpersonal tone. Explain when a direct request is clearer than extra politeness, and when an unfamiliar abbreviation needs expansion. Avoid cultural stereotypes or claims that one nationality always communicates a certain way.
4. Show two natural alternatives, such as a concise spoken version and a more explicit written version. Explain the tradeoff in each. Do not turn a request into an order, a possibility into a promise, or a pending decision into approval.
5. Ask me to respond to one realistic follow-up from the new reader, then wait. Finish by asking me to adapt the message for a second audience without losing its core meaning. Give feedback only after the attempt.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 01: Research Questions and Study Design
Original fictional case: A research proposal asks whether a program "works" without specifying the outcome or population.
Language workshop: Ask a precise question
Communication goal: Clarify missing information before responding.
Language guidance: Name the exact word, fact, or requirement you need clarified. Ask one focused question at a time. Repeat your understanding and give the other person a chance to correct it.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): When you say ..., do you mean ...? / Could you clarify which ...? / So, my understanding is ... . Is that right?
Vocabulary: research question: The specific question a study is designed to investigate. / hypothesis: A proposed explanation or prediction that can be examined using evidence. / methodology: The methods and reasoning used to conduct a study or analysis. / limitation: A condition that restricts what evidence, work, or a conclusion can establish.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to know exactly what information is missing. Give one answer only after your partner asks a focused question; then ask them to confirm their understanding.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person uses an ambiguous word such as 'ready', 'approved', or 'urgent'. Clarify it before continuing.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: What outcome would count as improvement, for whom, and over what period? A clearer research question will help us choose an appropriate design and describe its limits.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 01 · Research Questions and Study Design | Test recall and transfer

START PROMPT
TASK: A short retrieval session
1. Tell me to close my notes. Plan six questions: two vocabulary-in-context items, one grammar or meaning contrast, one question about a confirmed versus unknown detail, one short spoken-style response and one new-situation transfer task. Use the supplied material as the answer reference, but do not repeat its existing checks word for word.
2. Ask only the first question, then stop and wait. Prefer a short answer over a multiple-choice question. Do not display the remaining questions, model answers or a word bank in advance.
3. After each answer, say what it gets right and explain a meaningful error if there is one. Accept alternative wording when it preserves the facts and does the communication job. If I struggle, give one clue and invite a retry before revealing a model. Only then move to the next question.
4. Keep a simple record of which items I answered independently, with a hint, or after seeing a model. This records today's practice, not a certified proficiency score. Do not judge pronunciation from typed text.
5. At the end, summarize two strengths and two useful next steps with examples from my answers. Give me a small review card containing three prompts and a separate answer section. Suggest that I revisit it tomorrow and a week later; do not claim you will remember this session or send reminders. Label the final transfer scenario as fictional.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 01: Research Questions and Study Design
Original fictional case: A research proposal asks whether a program "works" without specifying the outcome or population.
Language workshop: Ask a precise question
Communication goal: Clarify missing information before responding.
Language guidance: Name the exact word, fact, or requirement you need clarified. Ask one focused question at a time. Repeat your understanding and give the other person a chance to correct it.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): When you say ..., do you mean ...? / Could you clarify which ...? / So, my understanding is ... . Is that right?
Vocabulary: research question: The specific question a study is designed to investigate. / hypothesis: A proposed explanation or prediction that can be examined using evidence. / methodology: The methods and reasoning used to conduct a study or analysis. / limitation: A condition that restricts what evidence, work, or a conclusion can establish.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to know exactly what information is missing. Give one answer only after your partner asks a focused question; then ask them to confirm their understanding.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person uses an ambiguous word such as 'ready', 'approved', or 'urgent'. Clarify it before continuing.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: What outcome would count as improvement, for whom, and over what period? A clearer research question will help us choose an appropriate design and describe its limits.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 01 · Research Questions and Study Design | Adapt a partner or class activity

START PROMPT
TASK: Adapt this material for a teaching session
1. Ask me one brief planning question covering learner support needs, group size and available time. Offer a default of two B2 learners and 20 minutes. Stop and wait; use the default only if I choose it.
2. Create a timed plan using the supplied case or dialogue, its actual terminology and one narrow language goal. Include an individual first attempt, partner exchange, focused feedback and a retry. Keep the total within the time I choose. State what the learner should be able to communicate at the end.
3. Provide separate role cards for two or three professional speakers. Each card needs an objective, known information and one question to resolve. Label any invented private information as a variation; do not contradict shared facts. Do not place the model answer on the learner cards.
4. Add a B1 support option with useful frames, a B2 independent task and a C1 extension involving a plausible competing constraint. Maintain the same professional meaning across levels. Explain unfamiliar terms without removing the field's normal language. Include a workable solo alternative.
5. Put teacher notes and suggested responses in a clearly separate section after the learner material. Include likely misunderstandings and a short observation checklist for facts, clarity, tone and next step. Accept multiple successful formulations. Finish with one exit question and a delayed-recall task; identify what the teacher should check before use.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 01: Research Questions and Study Design
Original fictional case: A research proposal asks whether a program "works" without specifying the outcome or population.
Language workshop: Ask a precise question
Communication goal: Clarify missing information before responding.
Language guidance: Name the exact word, fact, or requirement you need clarified. Ask one focused question at a time. Repeat your understanding and give the other person a chance to correct it.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): When you say ..., do you mean ...? / Could you clarify which ...? / So, my understanding is ... . Is that right?
Vocabulary: research question: The specific question a study is designed to investigate. / hypothesis: A proposed explanation or prediction that can be examined using evidence. / methodology: The methods and reasoning used to conduct a study or analysis. / limitation: A condition that restricts what evidence, work, or a conclusion can establish.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to know exactly what information is missing. Give one answer only after your partner asks a focused question; then ask them to confirm their understanding.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person uses an ambiguous word such as 'ready', 'approved', or 'urgent'. Clarify it before continuing.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: What outcome would count as improvement, for whom, and over what period? A clearer research question will help us choose an appropriate design and describe its limits.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 02 · Grant Proposals and Specific Aims | Build vocabulary and collocations

START PROMPT
TASK: Vocabulary in use
1. Choose four useful terms from the reference. For each, give a plain-English meaning in this field, two natural word combinations (collocations), one realistic example and a likely misuse or contrast. Keep the examples consistent with the reference and avoid jargon that does not fit this occupation.
2. Add four related terms that would be useful in a different common situation in the same field. Label these as suggested extensions, explain how they connect to the work, and flag regional or organizational variation where relevant. Do not pad the list with synonyms nobody would use at work.
3. Start a retrieval round: give one short workplace sentence with a gap and a clear clue. Ask me to supply the best term and explain my choice. Stop and wait; do not reveal the answer or a completed sentence yet. Accept another term if its meaning and collocation work.
4. After my attempt, explain one useful distinction and ask me to write my own sentence. Wait, correct a genuine meaning or usage problem, then give the next retrieval question. Work through four questions one at a time.
5. Finish with a short handoff or message task using three terms, followed by two recall questions I can save for another day. Do not pretend to schedule a reminder.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 02: Grant Proposals and Specific Aims
Original fictional case: A grant draft promises to solve a broad scientific problem using a small pilot study.
Language workshop: Match certainty to evidence
Communication goal: Separate observations, assumptions, and conclusions.
Language guidance: Say what the evidence shows, identify what is still unknown, and limit the conclusion to that evidence. Words such as 'may', 'suggests', and 'in this sample' are useful when the uncertainty is real. Do not soften an urgent, verified safety concern.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): The available evidence shows ... . / This may indicate ..., but ... . / We have not yet established whether ... .
Vocabulary: specific aims: The focused objectives a research proposal intends to achieve. / significance: The importance of a question or finding; statistical significance has a separate technical meaning. / innovation: A new or improved approach, product, or process intended to create value. / feasibility: Whether a proposed activity can reasonably be carried out under stated conditions.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to tell a colleague what is known. Ask which part is confirmed and which part is an assumption. Challenge one statement that sounds more certain than the case supports.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: Someone asks for a yes-or-no answer when the evidence supports only a qualified answer. Be concise while preserving the uncertainty.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: The pilot can test feasibility and provide preliminary evidence. It cannot resolve the entire problem. I'll narrow the aim so the proposed work and the claim match.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 02 · Grant Proposals and Specific Aims | Practice grammar in context

START PROMPT
TASK: Grammar that changes the meaning
1. For a lesson, use its language workshop as the focus. For a dialogue, quote one actual sentence and select one useful grammar feature from it, such as question word order, tense, modality, conditionals or clause linking. Explain in no more than 90 words how this feature helps the speakers do their work. Keep the grammar target narrow.
2. Give two short contrasting sentences using this workplace context. Explain the difference in time, certainty, condition or politeness. Label invented examples and preserve the distinction between possible, planned and confirmed events. Describe context-dependent choices as choices, not universal rules.
3. Give me one editing or sentence-building task using a known case fact. Do not copy the supplied editing example or reveal its answer. Ask me to explain my intended meaning. Stop and wait.
4. After I answer, quote my wording, identify at most two issues, and give a brief explanation and one hint. Ask me to revise before offering a full corrected version. Then accept any accurate, natural alternative that serves the purpose.
5. Continue with two new tasks, one at a time: first guided, then an original response without a sentence frame. End with a two-sentence workplace message using the target feature and a compact self-check. Do not replace this sequence with a worksheet and answer key.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 02: Grant Proposals and Specific Aims
Original fictional case: A grant draft promises to solve a broad scientific problem using a small pilot study.
Language workshop: Match certainty to evidence
Communication goal: Separate observations, assumptions, and conclusions.
Language guidance: Say what the evidence shows, identify what is still unknown, and limit the conclusion to that evidence. Words such as 'may', 'suggests', and 'in this sample' are useful when the uncertainty is real. Do not soften an urgent, verified safety concern.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): The available evidence shows ... . / This may indicate ..., but ... . / We have not yet established whether ... .
Vocabulary: specific aims: The focused objectives a research proposal intends to achieve. / significance: The importance of a question or finding; statistical significance has a separate technical meaning. / innovation: A new or improved approach, product, or process intended to create value. / feasibility: Whether a proposed activity can reasonably be carried out under stated conditions.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to tell a colleague what is known. Ask which part is confirmed and which part is an assumption. Challenge one statement that sounds more certain than the case supports.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: Someone asks for a yes-or-no answer when the evidence supports only a qualified answer. Be concise while preserving the uncertainty.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: The pilot can test feasibility and provide preliminary evidence. It cannot resolve the entire problem. I'll narrow the aim so the proposed work and the claim match.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 02 · Grant Proposals and Specific Aims | Rehearse with an AI colleague

START PROMPT
TASK: Interactive workplace role-play
1. Use the supplied case or dialogue as the starting situation. Give a two-sentence briefing and offer two relevant professional roles for me to choose from. For a supplied dialogue, use its actual roles. Ask which role I want, then stop and wait. Do not write my replies.
2. After I choose, identify who you will play and the immediate communication goal. Play the other professional; where a meeting requires a third person, label each of your speakers clearly. Start with one natural workplace turn and wait for my reply. Keep most turns to one to three sentences and ask no more than one question at a time.
3. Let the exchange develop across six to ten learner turns, or end earlier if I type "feedback". Respond to what I actually say. Include a plausible clarification, disagreement or tradeoff without silently changing the starting facts. Mark any added constraint as a fictional second-round variation. Do not resolve approvals, evidence or commitments that remain uncertain.
4. Stay in role during the exchange. If my meaning is unclear, ask for clarification naturally. Give a hint only if I ask or cannot proceed. Do not deliver a model conversation in advance.
5. At the debrief, quote two of my phrases: one successful choice and one worth improving. Check factual accuracy, language, register and whether the next step was clear. Give up to three focused suggestions. Ask me to retry the weakest turn; wait. Only then offer an alternative wording and a harder replay.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 02: Grant Proposals and Specific Aims
Original fictional case: A grant draft promises to solve a broad scientific problem using a small pilot study.
Language workshop: Match certainty to evidence
Communication goal: Separate observations, assumptions, and conclusions.
Language guidance: Say what the evidence shows, identify what is still unknown, and limit the conclusion to that evidence. Words such as 'may', 'suggests', and 'in this sample' are useful when the uncertainty is real. Do not soften an urgent, verified safety concern.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): The available evidence shows ... . / This may indicate ..., but ... . / We have not yet established whether ... .
Vocabulary: specific aims: The focused objectives a research proposal intends to achieve. / significance: The importance of a question or finding; statistical significance has a separate technical meaning. / innovation: A new or improved approach, product, or process intended to create value. / feasibility: Whether a proposed activity can reasonably be carried out under stated conditions.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to tell a colleague what is known. Ask which part is confirmed and which part is an assumption. Challenge one statement that sounds more certain than the case supports.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: Someone asks for a yes-or-no answer when the evidence supports only a qualified answer. Be concise while preserving the uncertainty.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: The pilot can test feasibility and provide preliminary evidence. It cannot resolve the entire problem. I'll narrow the aim so the proposed work and the claim match.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 02 · Grant Proposals and Specific Aims | Create more scenario dialogues

START PROMPT
TASK: Extend the conversation library
1. Propose six distinct, common scenarios in this field beyond the supplied case or script. For each, name the setting, two or more professional roles, the communication problem and one useful terminology focus. Include routine coordination, clarification, a complication, disagreement, handoff and follow-up where relevant. Choose scenarios that fit this profession, rather than forcing unsuitable situations into it.
2. Ask me to choose one scenario, or request all six in sequence. Stop and wait. Do not write all the scripts before I choose.
3. For the selected scenario, write an original fictional dialogue of 12-18 substantial speaking turns between two or three professionals. Name each role, establish an actual work problem, and let the exchange progress through questions, clarification, competing constraints and a credible next step or explicitly unresolved issue. Use the occupation's natural nomenclature and register. Avoid an interview between a teacher and a learner, generic small talk, and inserting a glossary definition into every reply. Explain specialist terms outside the dialogue instead.
4. After the script, explain five useful expressions in context, identify two grammar or register choices and ask three questions about the speakers' reasoning. Withhold the answers until I attempt them. Add one role-switch challenge.
5. Before presenting a script, check names, numbers, chronology, roles and terminology for consistency. Label invented facts and acknowledge uncertain specialist usage. If I requested all six, deliver one complete script at a time and wait for "next". Make each scenario materially different.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 02: Grant Proposals and Specific Aims
Original fictional case: A grant draft promises to solve a broad scientific problem using a small pilot study.
Language workshop: Match certainty to evidence
Communication goal: Separate observations, assumptions, and conclusions.
Language guidance: Say what the evidence shows, identify what is still unknown, and limit the conclusion to that evidence. Words such as 'may', 'suggests', and 'in this sample' are useful when the uncertainty is real. Do not soften an urgent, verified safety concern.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): The available evidence shows ... . / This may indicate ..., but ... . / We have not yet established whether ... .
Vocabulary: specific aims: The focused objectives a research proposal intends to achieve. / significance: The importance of a question or finding; statistical significance has a separate technical meaning. / innovation: A new or improved approach, product, or process intended to create value. / feasibility: Whether a proposed activity can reasonably be carried out under stated conditions.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to tell a colleague what is known. Ask which part is confirmed and which part is an assumption. Challenge one statement that sounds more certain than the case supports.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: Someone asks for a yes-or-no answer when the evidence supports only a qualified answer. Be concise while preserving the uncertainty.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: The pilot can test feasibility and provide preliminary evidence. It cannot resolve the entire problem. I'll narrow the aim so the proposed work and the claim match.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 02 · Grant Proposals and Specific Aims | Get feedback on a draft

START PROMPT
TASK: Coach my workplace writing
1. Ask me to paste my own fictional or anonymized draft and identify its reader and purpose. If the reference gives a writing task, mention that task as the default. If it is a dialogue, suggest a brief follow-up message that records its outcome and open questions. Stop and wait. Do not write the message for me first.
2. Once I supply the draft, check it against the reference. If an ambiguity changes the meaning, ask one focused question before rewriting. Do not assume that the draft is correct evidence for a new deadline, approval, diagnosis, cost or commitment.
3. Give feedback in three parts: one effective phrase with a reason; up to three priority improvements, quoting my words; and one short revision task for me. Prioritize incorrect facts or unclear action before minor grammar. For each language correction, explain why it matters to this reader. Label optional stylistic alternatives separately and preserve my level of certainty and intended politeness.
4. Stop and wait for my revision. Then compare the two attempts, identify an improvement and offer one edited version that preserves my voice and purpose. Keep the requested length; if none is specified, use 70-110 words. Explain any meaningful change rather than silently making the message stronger or more certain.
5. Close with one phrase worth reusing and a short transfer task for a different fictional reader. Wait for my attempt before providing another model.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 02: Grant Proposals and Specific Aims
Original fictional case: A grant draft promises to solve a broad scientific problem using a small pilot study.
Language workshop: Match certainty to evidence
Communication goal: Separate observations, assumptions, and conclusions.
Language guidance: Say what the evidence shows, identify what is still unknown, and limit the conclusion to that evidence. Words such as 'may', 'suggests', and 'in this sample' are useful when the uncertainty is real. Do not soften an urgent, verified safety concern.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): The available evidence shows ... . / This may indicate ..., but ... . / We have not yet established whether ... .
Vocabulary: specific aims: The focused objectives a research proposal intends to achieve. / significance: The importance of a question or finding; statistical significance has a separate technical meaning. / innovation: A new or improved approach, product, or process intended to create value. / feasibility: Whether a proposed activity can reasonably be carried out under stated conditions.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to tell a colleague what is known. Ask which part is confirmed and which part is an assumption. Challenge one statement that sounds more certain than the case supports.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: Someone asks for a yes-or-no answer when the evidence supports only a qualified answer. Be concise while preserving the uncertainty.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: The pilot can test feasibility and provide preliminary evidence. It cannot resolve the entire problem. I'll narrow the aim so the proposed work and the claim match.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 02 · Grant Proposals and Specific Aims | Adjust tone and register

START PROMPT
TASK: Match the language to the listener
1. Choose a short message or utterance from the reference and quote it exactly. Identify its purpose and likely audience. Ask me to choose a new audience: a close colleague, a decision-maker, or an external reader who may not know the jargon. Stop and wait.
2. Ask me to adapt that message for the chosen reader, keeping its facts and degree of certainty unchanged. Offer a short frame only if I request help. Wait for my attempt before showing alternatives.
3. Discuss at most three choices in my version: directness, specialist vocabulary and interpersonal tone. Explain when a direct request is clearer than extra politeness, and when an unfamiliar abbreviation needs expansion. Avoid cultural stereotypes or claims that one nationality always communicates a certain way.
4. Show two natural alternatives, such as a concise spoken version and a more explicit written version. Explain the tradeoff in each. Do not turn a request into an order, a possibility into a promise, or a pending decision into approval.
5. Ask me to respond to one realistic follow-up from the new reader, then wait. Finish by asking me to adapt the message for a second audience without losing its core meaning. Give feedback only after the attempt.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 02: Grant Proposals and Specific Aims
Original fictional case: A grant draft promises to solve a broad scientific problem using a small pilot study.
Language workshop: Match certainty to evidence
Communication goal: Separate observations, assumptions, and conclusions.
Language guidance: Say what the evidence shows, identify what is still unknown, and limit the conclusion to that evidence. Words such as 'may', 'suggests', and 'in this sample' are useful when the uncertainty is real. Do not soften an urgent, verified safety concern.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): The available evidence shows ... . / This may indicate ..., but ... . / We have not yet established whether ... .
Vocabulary: specific aims: The focused objectives a research proposal intends to achieve. / significance: The importance of a question or finding; statistical significance has a separate technical meaning. / innovation: A new or improved approach, product, or process intended to create value. / feasibility: Whether a proposed activity can reasonably be carried out under stated conditions.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to tell a colleague what is known. Ask which part is confirmed and which part is an assumption. Challenge one statement that sounds more certain than the case supports.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: Someone asks for a yes-or-no answer when the evidence supports only a qualified answer. Be concise while preserving the uncertainty.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: The pilot can test feasibility and provide preliminary evidence. It cannot resolve the entire problem. I'll narrow the aim so the proposed work and the claim match.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 02 · Grant Proposals and Specific Aims | Test recall and transfer

START PROMPT
TASK: A short retrieval session
1. Tell me to close my notes. Plan six questions: two vocabulary-in-context items, one grammar or meaning contrast, one question about a confirmed versus unknown detail, one short spoken-style response and one new-situation transfer task. Use the supplied material as the answer reference, but do not repeat its existing checks word for word.
2. Ask only the first question, then stop and wait. Prefer a short answer over a multiple-choice question. Do not display the remaining questions, model answers or a word bank in advance.
3. After each answer, say what it gets right and explain a meaningful error if there is one. Accept alternative wording when it preserves the facts and does the communication job. If I struggle, give one clue and invite a retry before revealing a model. Only then move to the next question.
4. Keep a simple record of which items I answered independently, with a hint, or after seeing a model. This records today's practice, not a certified proficiency score. Do not judge pronunciation from typed text.
5. At the end, summarize two strengths and two useful next steps with examples from my answers. Give me a small review card containing three prompts and a separate answer section. Suggest that I revisit it tomorrow and a week later; do not claim you will remember this session or send reminders. Label the final transfer scenario as fictional.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 02: Grant Proposals and Specific Aims
Original fictional case: A grant draft promises to solve a broad scientific problem using a small pilot study.
Language workshop: Match certainty to evidence
Communication goal: Separate observations, assumptions, and conclusions.
Language guidance: Say what the evidence shows, identify what is still unknown, and limit the conclusion to that evidence. Words such as 'may', 'suggests', and 'in this sample' are useful when the uncertainty is real. Do not soften an urgent, verified safety concern.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): The available evidence shows ... . / This may indicate ..., but ... . / We have not yet established whether ... .
Vocabulary: specific aims: The focused objectives a research proposal intends to achieve. / significance: The importance of a question or finding; statistical significance has a separate technical meaning. / innovation: A new or improved approach, product, or process intended to create value. / feasibility: Whether a proposed activity can reasonably be carried out under stated conditions.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to tell a colleague what is known. Ask which part is confirmed and which part is an assumption. Challenge one statement that sounds more certain than the case supports.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: Someone asks for a yes-or-no answer when the evidence supports only a qualified answer. Be concise while preserving the uncertainty.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: The pilot can test feasibility and provide preliminary evidence. It cannot resolve the entire problem. I'll narrow the aim so the proposed work and the claim match.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 02 · Grant Proposals and Specific Aims | Adapt a partner or class activity

START PROMPT
TASK: Adapt this material for a teaching session
1. Ask me one brief planning question covering learner support needs, group size and available time. Offer a default of two B2 learners and 20 minutes. Stop and wait; use the default only if I choose it.
2. Create a timed plan using the supplied case or dialogue, its actual terminology and one narrow language goal. Include an individual first attempt, partner exchange, focused feedback and a retry. Keep the total within the time I choose. State what the learner should be able to communicate at the end.
3. Provide separate role cards for two or three professional speakers. Each card needs an objective, known information and one question to resolve. Label any invented private information as a variation; do not contradict shared facts. Do not place the model answer on the learner cards.
4. Add a B1 support option with useful frames, a B2 independent task and a C1 extension involving a plausible competing constraint. Maintain the same professional meaning across levels. Explain unfamiliar terms without removing the field's normal language. Include a workable solo alternative.
5. Put teacher notes and suggested responses in a clearly separate section after the learner material. Include likely misunderstandings and a short observation checklist for facts, clarity, tone and next step. Accept multiple successful formulations. Finish with one exit question and a delayed-recall task; identify what the teacher should check before use.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 02: Grant Proposals and Specific Aims
Original fictional case: A grant draft promises to solve a broad scientific problem using a small pilot study.
Language workshop: Match certainty to evidence
Communication goal: Separate observations, assumptions, and conclusions.
Language guidance: Say what the evidence shows, identify what is still unknown, and limit the conclusion to that evidence. Words such as 'may', 'suggests', and 'in this sample' are useful when the uncertainty is real. Do not soften an urgent, verified safety concern.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): The available evidence shows ... . / This may indicate ..., but ... . / We have not yet established whether ... .
Vocabulary: specific aims: The focused objectives a research proposal intends to achieve. / significance: The importance of a question or finding; statistical significance has a separate technical meaning. / innovation: A new or improved approach, product, or process intended to create value. / feasibility: Whether a proposed activity can reasonably be carried out under stated conditions.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to tell a colleague what is known. Ask which part is confirmed and which part is an assumption. Challenge one statement that sounds more certain than the case supports.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: Someone asks for a yes-or-no answer when the evidence supports only a qualified answer. Be concise while preserving the uncertainty.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: The pilot can test feasibility and provide preliminary evidence. It cannot resolve the entire problem. I'll narrow the aim so the proposed work and the claim match.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 03 · Lab Meetings and Data Challenges | Build vocabulary and collocations

START PROMPT
TASK: Vocabulary in use
1. Choose four useful terms from the reference. For each, give a plain-English meaning in this field, two natural word combinations (collocations), one realistic example and a likely misuse or contrast. Keep the examples consistent with the reference and avoid jargon that does not fit this occupation.
2. Add four related terms that would be useful in a different common situation in the same field. Label these as suggested extensions, explain how they connect to the work, and flag regional or organizational variation where relevant. Do not pad the list with synonyms nobody would use at work.
3. Start a retrieval round: give one short workplace sentence with a gap and a clear clue. Ask me to supply the best term and explain my choice. Stop and wait; do not reveal the answer or a completed sentence yet. Accept another term if its meaning and collocation work.
4. After my attempt, explain one useful distinction and ask me to write my own sentence. Wait, correct a genuine meaning or usage problem, then give the next retrieval question. Work through four questions one at a time.
5. Finish with a short handoff or message task using three terms, followed by two recall questions I can save for another day. Do not pretend to schedule a reminder.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 03: Lab Meetings and Data Challenges
Original fictional case: A result differs from an earlier experiment, but the lab notes omit a protocol change.
Language workshop: Ask for an actionable next step
Communication goal: Make a request with a clear action, purpose, and realistic timing.
Language guidance: State the action and the information needed. Explain why it matters and specify a deadline only when one is given or agreed. 'Could you' is polite; repeated apologies can obscure a legitimate request. Urgent situations may require a direct request.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Could you provide ... so that ...? / Please confirm ... by [agreed time]. / If that timing is not possible, please let me know ... .
Vocabulary: control: A process, approval, check, or technical safeguard designed to reduce risk. / replication: Repeating a study or test to examine whether a finding holds again. / protocol drift: A gradual or unnoticed departure from the planned study or working procedure. / analysis assumption: A condition treated as true for the purpose of an analysis.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You can help but need a clear request and its purpose. Ask what is required and whether the timing is fixed or negotiable.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person cannot meet the requested timing. Clarify an alternative without inventing authority to change a formal deadline.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could we compare the protocol versions and recorded conditions? Please add the missing change to the record so the team can assess possible explanations for the difference.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 03 · Lab Meetings and Data Challenges | Practice grammar in context

START PROMPT
TASK: Grammar that changes the meaning
1. For a lesson, use its language workshop as the focus. For a dialogue, quote one actual sentence and select one useful grammar feature from it, such as question word order, tense, modality, conditionals or clause linking. Explain in no more than 90 words how this feature helps the speakers do their work. Keep the grammar target narrow.
2. Give two short contrasting sentences using this workplace context. Explain the difference in time, certainty, condition or politeness. Label invented examples and preserve the distinction between possible, planned and confirmed events. Describe context-dependent choices as choices, not universal rules.
3. Give me one editing or sentence-building task using a known case fact. Do not copy the supplied editing example or reveal its answer. Ask me to explain my intended meaning. Stop and wait.
4. After I answer, quote my wording, identify at most two issues, and give a brief explanation and one hint. Ask me to revise before offering a full corrected version. Then accept any accurate, natural alternative that serves the purpose.
5. Continue with two new tasks, one at a time: first guided, then an original response without a sentence frame. End with a two-sentence workplace message using the target feature and a compact self-check. Do not replace this sequence with a worksheet and answer key.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 03: Lab Meetings and Data Challenges
Original fictional case: A result differs from an earlier experiment, but the lab notes omit a protocol change.
Language workshop: Ask for an actionable next step
Communication goal: Make a request with a clear action, purpose, and realistic timing.
Language guidance: State the action and the information needed. Explain why it matters and specify a deadline only when one is given or agreed. 'Could you' is polite; repeated apologies can obscure a legitimate request. Urgent situations may require a direct request.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Could you provide ... so that ...? / Please confirm ... by [agreed time]. / If that timing is not possible, please let me know ... .
Vocabulary: control: A process, approval, check, or technical safeguard designed to reduce risk. / replication: Repeating a study or test to examine whether a finding holds again. / protocol drift: A gradual or unnoticed departure from the planned study or working procedure. / analysis assumption: A condition treated as true for the purpose of an analysis.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You can help but need a clear request and its purpose. Ask what is required and whether the timing is fixed or negotiable.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person cannot meet the requested timing. Clarify an alternative without inventing authority to change a formal deadline.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could we compare the protocol versions and recorded conditions? Please add the missing change to the record so the team can assess possible explanations for the difference.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 03 · Lab Meetings and Data Challenges | Rehearse with an AI colleague

START PROMPT
TASK: Interactive workplace role-play
1. Use the supplied case or dialogue as the starting situation. Give a two-sentence briefing and offer two relevant professional roles for me to choose from. For a supplied dialogue, use its actual roles. Ask which role I want, then stop and wait. Do not write my replies.
2. After I choose, identify who you will play and the immediate communication goal. Play the other professional; where a meeting requires a third person, label each of your speakers clearly. Start with one natural workplace turn and wait for my reply. Keep most turns to one to three sentences and ask no more than one question at a time.
3. Let the exchange develop across six to ten learner turns, or end earlier if I type "feedback". Respond to what I actually say. Include a plausible clarification, disagreement or tradeoff without silently changing the starting facts. Mark any added constraint as a fictional second-round variation. Do not resolve approvals, evidence or commitments that remain uncertain.
4. Stay in role during the exchange. If my meaning is unclear, ask for clarification naturally. Give a hint only if I ask or cannot proceed. Do not deliver a model conversation in advance.
5. At the debrief, quote two of my phrases: one successful choice and one worth improving. Check factual accuracy, language, register and whether the next step was clear. Give up to three focused suggestions. Ask me to retry the weakest turn; wait. Only then offer an alternative wording and a harder replay.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 03: Lab Meetings and Data Challenges
Original fictional case: A result differs from an earlier experiment, but the lab notes omit a protocol change.
Language workshop: Ask for an actionable next step
Communication goal: Make a request with a clear action, purpose, and realistic timing.
Language guidance: State the action and the information needed. Explain why it matters and specify a deadline only when one is given or agreed. 'Could you' is polite; repeated apologies can obscure a legitimate request. Urgent situations may require a direct request.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Could you provide ... so that ...? / Please confirm ... by [agreed time]. / If that timing is not possible, please let me know ... .
Vocabulary: control: A process, approval, check, or technical safeguard designed to reduce risk. / replication: Repeating a study or test to examine whether a finding holds again. / protocol drift: A gradual or unnoticed departure from the planned study or working procedure. / analysis assumption: A condition treated as true for the purpose of an analysis.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You can help but need a clear request and its purpose. Ask what is required and whether the timing is fixed or negotiable.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person cannot meet the requested timing. Clarify an alternative without inventing authority to change a formal deadline.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could we compare the protocol versions and recorded conditions? Please add the missing change to the record so the team can assess possible explanations for the difference.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 03 · Lab Meetings and Data Challenges | Create more scenario dialogues

START PROMPT
TASK: Extend the conversation library
1. Propose six distinct, common scenarios in this field beyond the supplied case or script. For each, name the setting, two or more professional roles, the communication problem and one useful terminology focus. Include routine coordination, clarification, a complication, disagreement, handoff and follow-up where relevant. Choose scenarios that fit this profession, rather than forcing unsuitable situations into it.
2. Ask me to choose one scenario, or request all six in sequence. Stop and wait. Do not write all the scripts before I choose.
3. For the selected scenario, write an original fictional dialogue of 12-18 substantial speaking turns between two or three professionals. Name each role, establish an actual work problem, and let the exchange progress through questions, clarification, competing constraints and a credible next step or explicitly unresolved issue. Use the occupation's natural nomenclature and register. Avoid an interview between a teacher and a learner, generic small talk, and inserting a glossary definition into every reply. Explain specialist terms outside the dialogue instead.
4. After the script, explain five useful expressions in context, identify two grammar or register choices and ask three questions about the speakers' reasoning. Withhold the answers until I attempt them. Add one role-switch challenge.
5. Before presenting a script, check names, numbers, chronology, roles and terminology for consistency. Label invented facts and acknowledge uncertain specialist usage. If I requested all six, deliver one complete script at a time and wait for "next". Make each scenario materially different.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 03: Lab Meetings and Data Challenges
Original fictional case: A result differs from an earlier experiment, but the lab notes omit a protocol change.
Language workshop: Ask for an actionable next step
Communication goal: Make a request with a clear action, purpose, and realistic timing.
Language guidance: State the action and the information needed. Explain why it matters and specify a deadline only when one is given or agreed. 'Could you' is polite; repeated apologies can obscure a legitimate request. Urgent situations may require a direct request.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Could you provide ... so that ...? / Please confirm ... by [agreed time]. / If that timing is not possible, please let me know ... .
Vocabulary: control: A process, approval, check, or technical safeguard designed to reduce risk. / replication: Repeating a study or test to examine whether a finding holds again. / protocol drift: A gradual or unnoticed departure from the planned study or working procedure. / analysis assumption: A condition treated as true for the purpose of an analysis.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You can help but need a clear request and its purpose. Ask what is required and whether the timing is fixed or negotiable.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person cannot meet the requested timing. Clarify an alternative without inventing authority to change a formal deadline.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could we compare the protocol versions and recorded conditions? Please add the missing change to the record so the team can assess possible explanations for the difference.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 03 · Lab Meetings and Data Challenges | Get feedback on a draft

START PROMPT
TASK: Coach my workplace writing
1. Ask me to paste my own fictional or anonymized draft and identify its reader and purpose. If the reference gives a writing task, mention that task as the default. If it is a dialogue, suggest a brief follow-up message that records its outcome and open questions. Stop and wait. Do not write the message for me first.
2. Once I supply the draft, check it against the reference. If an ambiguity changes the meaning, ask one focused question before rewriting. Do not assume that the draft is correct evidence for a new deadline, approval, diagnosis, cost or commitment.
3. Give feedback in three parts: one effective phrase with a reason; up to three priority improvements, quoting my words; and one short revision task for me. Prioritize incorrect facts or unclear action before minor grammar. For each language correction, explain why it matters to this reader. Label optional stylistic alternatives separately and preserve my level of certainty and intended politeness.
4. Stop and wait for my revision. Then compare the two attempts, identify an improvement and offer one edited version that preserves my voice and purpose. Keep the requested length; if none is specified, use 70-110 words. Explain any meaningful change rather than silently making the message stronger or more certain.
5. Close with one phrase worth reusing and a short transfer task for a different fictional reader. Wait for my attempt before providing another model.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 03: Lab Meetings and Data Challenges
Original fictional case: A result differs from an earlier experiment, but the lab notes omit a protocol change.
Language workshop: Ask for an actionable next step
Communication goal: Make a request with a clear action, purpose, and realistic timing.
Language guidance: State the action and the information needed. Explain why it matters and specify a deadline only when one is given or agreed. 'Could you' is polite; repeated apologies can obscure a legitimate request. Urgent situations may require a direct request.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Could you provide ... so that ...? / Please confirm ... by [agreed time]. / If that timing is not possible, please let me know ... .
Vocabulary: control: A process, approval, check, or technical safeguard designed to reduce risk. / replication: Repeating a study or test to examine whether a finding holds again. / protocol drift: A gradual or unnoticed departure from the planned study or working procedure. / analysis assumption: A condition treated as true for the purpose of an analysis.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You can help but need a clear request and its purpose. Ask what is required and whether the timing is fixed or negotiable.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person cannot meet the requested timing. Clarify an alternative without inventing authority to change a formal deadline.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could we compare the protocol versions and recorded conditions? Please add the missing change to the record so the team can assess possible explanations for the difference.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 03 · Lab Meetings and Data Challenges | Adjust tone and register

START PROMPT
TASK: Match the language to the listener
1. Choose a short message or utterance from the reference and quote it exactly. Identify its purpose and likely audience. Ask me to choose a new audience: a close colleague, a decision-maker, or an external reader who may not know the jargon. Stop and wait.
2. Ask me to adapt that message for the chosen reader, keeping its facts and degree of certainty unchanged. Offer a short frame only if I request help. Wait for my attempt before showing alternatives.
3. Discuss at most three choices in my version: directness, specialist vocabulary and interpersonal tone. Explain when a direct request is clearer than extra politeness, and when an unfamiliar abbreviation needs expansion. Avoid cultural stereotypes or claims that one nationality always communicates a certain way.
4. Show two natural alternatives, such as a concise spoken version and a more explicit written version. Explain the tradeoff in each. Do not turn a request into an order, a possibility into a promise, or a pending decision into approval.
5. Ask me to respond to one realistic follow-up from the new reader, then wait. Finish by asking me to adapt the message for a second audience without losing its core meaning. Give feedback only after the attempt.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 03: Lab Meetings and Data Challenges
Original fictional case: A result differs from an earlier experiment, but the lab notes omit a protocol change.
Language workshop: Ask for an actionable next step
Communication goal: Make a request with a clear action, purpose, and realistic timing.
Language guidance: State the action and the information needed. Explain why it matters and specify a deadline only when one is given or agreed. 'Could you' is polite; repeated apologies can obscure a legitimate request. Urgent situations may require a direct request.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Could you provide ... so that ...? / Please confirm ... by [agreed time]. / If that timing is not possible, please let me know ... .
Vocabulary: control: A process, approval, check, or technical safeguard designed to reduce risk. / replication: Repeating a study or test to examine whether a finding holds again. / protocol drift: A gradual or unnoticed departure from the planned study or working procedure. / analysis assumption: A condition treated as true for the purpose of an analysis.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You can help but need a clear request and its purpose. Ask what is required and whether the timing is fixed or negotiable.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person cannot meet the requested timing. Clarify an alternative without inventing authority to change a formal deadline.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could we compare the protocol versions and recorded conditions? Please add the missing change to the record so the team can assess possible explanations for the difference.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 03 · Lab Meetings and Data Challenges | Test recall and transfer

START PROMPT
TASK: A short retrieval session
1. Tell me to close my notes. Plan six questions: two vocabulary-in-context items, one grammar or meaning contrast, one question about a confirmed versus unknown detail, one short spoken-style response and one new-situation transfer task. Use the supplied material as the answer reference, but do not repeat its existing checks word for word.
2. Ask only the first question, then stop and wait. Prefer a short answer over a multiple-choice question. Do not display the remaining questions, model answers or a word bank in advance.
3. After each answer, say what it gets right and explain a meaningful error if there is one. Accept alternative wording when it preserves the facts and does the communication job. If I struggle, give one clue and invite a retry before revealing a model. Only then move to the next question.
4. Keep a simple record of which items I answered independently, with a hint, or after seeing a model. This records today's practice, not a certified proficiency score. Do not judge pronunciation from typed text.
5. At the end, summarize two strengths and two useful next steps with examples from my answers. Give me a small review card containing three prompts and a separate answer section. Suggest that I revisit it tomorrow and a week later; do not claim you will remember this session or send reminders. Label the final transfer scenario as fictional.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 03: Lab Meetings and Data Challenges
Original fictional case: A result differs from an earlier experiment, but the lab notes omit a protocol change.
Language workshop: Ask for an actionable next step
Communication goal: Make a request with a clear action, purpose, and realistic timing.
Language guidance: State the action and the information needed. Explain why it matters and specify a deadline only when one is given or agreed. 'Could you' is polite; repeated apologies can obscure a legitimate request. Urgent situations may require a direct request.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Could you provide ... so that ...? / Please confirm ... by [agreed time]. / If that timing is not possible, please let me know ... .
Vocabulary: control: A process, approval, check, or technical safeguard designed to reduce risk. / replication: Repeating a study or test to examine whether a finding holds again. / protocol drift: A gradual or unnoticed departure from the planned study or working procedure. / analysis assumption: A condition treated as true for the purpose of an analysis.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You can help but need a clear request and its purpose. Ask what is required and whether the timing is fixed or negotiable.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person cannot meet the requested timing. Clarify an alternative without inventing authority to change a formal deadline.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could we compare the protocol versions and recorded conditions? Please add the missing change to the record so the team can assess possible explanations for the difference.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 03 · Lab Meetings and Data Challenges | Adapt a partner or class activity

START PROMPT
TASK: Adapt this material for a teaching session
1. Ask me one brief planning question covering learner support needs, group size and available time. Offer a default of two B2 learners and 20 minutes. Stop and wait; use the default only if I choose it.
2. Create a timed plan using the supplied case or dialogue, its actual terminology and one narrow language goal. Include an individual first attempt, partner exchange, focused feedback and a retry. Keep the total within the time I choose. State what the learner should be able to communicate at the end.
3. Provide separate role cards for two or three professional speakers. Each card needs an objective, known information and one question to resolve. Label any invented private information as a variation; do not contradict shared facts. Do not place the model answer on the learner cards.
4. Add a B1 support option with useful frames, a B2 independent task and a C1 extension involving a plausible competing constraint. Maintain the same professional meaning across levels. Explain unfamiliar terms without removing the field's normal language. Include a workable solo alternative.
5. Put teacher notes and suggested responses in a clearly separate section after the learner material. Include likely misunderstandings and a short observation checklist for facts, clarity, tone and next step. Accept multiple successful formulations. Finish with one exit question and a delayed-recall task; identify what the teacher should check before use.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 03: Lab Meetings and Data Challenges
Original fictional case: A result differs from an earlier experiment, but the lab notes omit a protocol change.
Language workshop: Ask for an actionable next step
Communication goal: Make a request with a clear action, purpose, and realistic timing.
Language guidance: State the action and the information needed. Explain why it matters and specify a deadline only when one is given or agreed. 'Could you' is polite; repeated apologies can obscure a legitimate request. Urgent situations may require a direct request.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Could you provide ... so that ...? / Please confirm ... by [agreed time]. / If that timing is not possible, please let me know ... .
Vocabulary: control: A process, approval, check, or technical safeguard designed to reduce risk. / replication: Repeating a study or test to examine whether a finding holds again. / protocol drift: A gradual or unnoticed departure from the planned study or working procedure. / analysis assumption: A condition treated as true for the purpose of an analysis.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You can help but need a clear request and its purpose. Ask what is required and whether the timing is fixed or negotiable.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person cannot meet the requested timing. Clarify an alternative without inventing authority to change a formal deadline.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could we compare the protocol versions and recorded conditions? Please add the missing change to the record so the team can assess possible explanations for the difference.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 04 · Research Ethics and Human Subjects | Build vocabulary and collocations

START PROMPT
TASK: Vocabulary in use
1. Choose four useful terms from the reference. For each, give a plain-English meaning in this field, two natural word combinations (collocations), one realistic example and a likely misuse or contrast. Keep the examples consistent with the reference and avoid jargon that does not fit this occupation.
2. Add four related terms that would be useful in a different common situation in the same field. Label these as suggested extensions, explain how they connect to the work, and flag regional or organizational variation where relevant. Do not pad the list with synonyms nobody would use at work.
3. Start a retrieval round: give one short workplace sentence with a gap and a clear clue. Ask me to supply the best term and explain my choice. Stop and wait; do not reveal the answer or a completed sentence yet. Accept another term if its meaning and collocation work.
4. After my attempt, explain one useful distinction and ask me to write my own sentence. Wait, correct a genuine meaning or usage problem, then give the next retrieval question. Work through four questions one at a time.
5. Finish with a short handoff or message task using three terms, followed by two recall questions I can save for another day. Do not pretend to schedule a reminder.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 04: Research Ethics and Human Subjects
Original fictional case: A researcher wants to reuse participant data for a new question. The existing approval and consent materials have not been reviewed.
Language workshop: Ask a precise question
Communication goal: Clarify missing information before responding.
Language guidance: Name the exact word, fact, or requirement you need clarified. Ask one focused question at a time. Repeat your understanding and give the other person a chance to correct it.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): When you say ..., do you mean ...? / Could you clarify which ...? / So, my understanding is ... . Is that right?
Vocabulary: IRB: Institutional review board: a body that reviews covered human-subjects research under applicable requirements. / informed consent: A process of providing relevant information and obtaining voluntary agreement under applicable requirements. / secondary use: Use of data or material for a purpose beyond the original collection or primary purpose. / human subjects: People whose participation or identifiable information is involved in research under the applicable definition.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to know exactly what information is missing. Give one answer only after your partner asks a focused question; then ask them to confirm their understanding.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person uses an ambiguous word such as 'ready', 'approved', or 'urgent'. Clarify it before continuing.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Does the proposed use fall within the relevant approval and consent arrangements? Let's check with the appropriate ethics and data-governance processes before assuming reuse is permitted.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 04 · Research Ethics and Human Subjects | Practice grammar in context

START PROMPT
TASK: Grammar that changes the meaning
1. For a lesson, use its language workshop as the focus. For a dialogue, quote one actual sentence and select one useful grammar feature from it, such as question word order, tense, modality, conditionals or clause linking. Explain in no more than 90 words how this feature helps the speakers do their work. Keep the grammar target narrow.
2. Give two short contrasting sentences using this workplace context. Explain the difference in time, certainty, condition or politeness. Label invented examples and preserve the distinction between possible, planned and confirmed events. Describe context-dependent choices as choices, not universal rules.
3. Give me one editing or sentence-building task using a known case fact. Do not copy the supplied editing example or reveal its answer. Ask me to explain my intended meaning. Stop and wait.
4. After I answer, quote my wording, identify at most two issues, and give a brief explanation and one hint. Ask me to revise before offering a full corrected version. Then accept any accurate, natural alternative that serves the purpose.
5. Continue with two new tasks, one at a time: first guided, then an original response without a sentence frame. End with a two-sentence workplace message using the target feature and a compact self-check. Do not replace this sequence with a worksheet and answer key.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 04: Research Ethics and Human Subjects
Original fictional case: A researcher wants to reuse participant data for a new question. The existing approval and consent materials have not been reviewed.
Language workshop: Ask a precise question
Communication goal: Clarify missing information before responding.
Language guidance: Name the exact word, fact, or requirement you need clarified. Ask one focused question at a time. Repeat your understanding and give the other person a chance to correct it.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): When you say ..., do you mean ...? / Could you clarify which ...? / So, my understanding is ... . Is that right?
Vocabulary: IRB: Institutional review board: a body that reviews covered human-subjects research under applicable requirements. / informed consent: A process of providing relevant information and obtaining voluntary agreement under applicable requirements. / secondary use: Use of data or material for a purpose beyond the original collection or primary purpose. / human subjects: People whose participation or identifiable information is involved in research under the applicable definition.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to know exactly what information is missing. Give one answer only after your partner asks a focused question; then ask them to confirm their understanding.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person uses an ambiguous word such as 'ready', 'approved', or 'urgent'. Clarify it before continuing.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Does the proposed use fall within the relevant approval and consent arrangements? Let's check with the appropriate ethics and data-governance processes before assuming reuse is permitted.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 04 · Research Ethics and Human Subjects | Rehearse with an AI colleague

START PROMPT
TASK: Interactive workplace role-play
1. Use the supplied case or dialogue as the starting situation. Give a two-sentence briefing and offer two relevant professional roles for me to choose from. For a supplied dialogue, use its actual roles. Ask which role I want, then stop and wait. Do not write my replies.
2. After I choose, identify who you will play and the immediate communication goal. Play the other professional; where a meeting requires a third person, label each of your speakers clearly. Start with one natural workplace turn and wait for my reply. Keep most turns to one to three sentences and ask no more than one question at a time.
3. Let the exchange develop across six to ten learner turns, or end earlier if I type "feedback". Respond to what I actually say. Include a plausible clarification, disagreement or tradeoff without silently changing the starting facts. Mark any added constraint as a fictional second-round variation. Do not resolve approvals, evidence or commitments that remain uncertain.
4. Stay in role during the exchange. If my meaning is unclear, ask for clarification naturally. Give a hint only if I ask or cannot proceed. Do not deliver a model conversation in advance.
5. At the debrief, quote two of my phrases: one successful choice and one worth improving. Check factual accuracy, language, register and whether the next step was clear. Give up to three focused suggestions. Ask me to retry the weakest turn; wait. Only then offer an alternative wording and a harder replay.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 04: Research Ethics and Human Subjects
Original fictional case: A researcher wants to reuse participant data for a new question. The existing approval and consent materials have not been reviewed.
Language workshop: Ask a precise question
Communication goal: Clarify missing information before responding.
Language guidance: Name the exact word, fact, or requirement you need clarified. Ask one focused question at a time. Repeat your understanding and give the other person a chance to correct it.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): When you say ..., do you mean ...? / Could you clarify which ...? / So, my understanding is ... . Is that right?
Vocabulary: IRB: Institutional review board: a body that reviews covered human-subjects research under applicable requirements. / informed consent: A process of providing relevant information and obtaining voluntary agreement under applicable requirements. / secondary use: Use of data or material for a purpose beyond the original collection or primary purpose. / human subjects: People whose participation or identifiable information is involved in research under the applicable definition.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to know exactly what information is missing. Give one answer only after your partner asks a focused question; then ask them to confirm their understanding.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person uses an ambiguous word such as 'ready', 'approved', or 'urgent'. Clarify it before continuing.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Does the proposed use fall within the relevant approval and consent arrangements? Let's check with the appropriate ethics and data-governance processes before assuming reuse is permitted.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 04 · Research Ethics and Human Subjects | Create more scenario dialogues

START PROMPT
TASK: Extend the conversation library
1. Propose six distinct, common scenarios in this field beyond the supplied case or script. For each, name the setting, two or more professional roles, the communication problem and one useful terminology focus. Include routine coordination, clarification, a complication, disagreement, handoff and follow-up where relevant. Choose scenarios that fit this profession, rather than forcing unsuitable situations into it.
2. Ask me to choose one scenario, or request all six in sequence. Stop and wait. Do not write all the scripts before I choose.
3. For the selected scenario, write an original fictional dialogue of 12-18 substantial speaking turns between two or three professionals. Name each role, establish an actual work problem, and let the exchange progress through questions, clarification, competing constraints and a credible next step or explicitly unresolved issue. Use the occupation's natural nomenclature and register. Avoid an interview between a teacher and a learner, generic small talk, and inserting a glossary definition into every reply. Explain specialist terms outside the dialogue instead.
4. After the script, explain five useful expressions in context, identify two grammar or register choices and ask three questions about the speakers' reasoning. Withhold the answers until I attempt them. Add one role-switch challenge.
5. Before presenting a script, check names, numbers, chronology, roles and terminology for consistency. Label invented facts and acknowledge uncertain specialist usage. If I requested all six, deliver one complete script at a time and wait for "next". Make each scenario materially different.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 04: Research Ethics and Human Subjects
Original fictional case: A researcher wants to reuse participant data for a new question. The existing approval and consent materials have not been reviewed.
Language workshop: Ask a precise question
Communication goal: Clarify missing information before responding.
Language guidance: Name the exact word, fact, or requirement you need clarified. Ask one focused question at a time. Repeat your understanding and give the other person a chance to correct it.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): When you say ..., do you mean ...? / Could you clarify which ...? / So, my understanding is ... . Is that right?
Vocabulary: IRB: Institutional review board: a body that reviews covered human-subjects research under applicable requirements. / informed consent: A process of providing relevant information and obtaining voluntary agreement under applicable requirements. / secondary use: Use of data or material for a purpose beyond the original collection or primary purpose. / human subjects: People whose participation or identifiable information is involved in research under the applicable definition.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to know exactly what information is missing. Give one answer only after your partner asks a focused question; then ask them to confirm their understanding.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person uses an ambiguous word such as 'ready', 'approved', or 'urgent'. Clarify it before continuing.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Does the proposed use fall within the relevant approval and consent arrangements? Let's check with the appropriate ethics and data-governance processes before assuming reuse is permitted.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 04 · Research Ethics and Human Subjects | Get feedback on a draft

START PROMPT
TASK: Coach my workplace writing
1. Ask me to paste my own fictional or anonymized draft and identify its reader and purpose. If the reference gives a writing task, mention that task as the default. If it is a dialogue, suggest a brief follow-up message that records its outcome and open questions. Stop and wait. Do not write the message for me first.
2. Once I supply the draft, check it against the reference. If an ambiguity changes the meaning, ask one focused question before rewriting. Do not assume that the draft is correct evidence for a new deadline, approval, diagnosis, cost or commitment.
3. Give feedback in three parts: one effective phrase with a reason; up to three priority improvements, quoting my words; and one short revision task for me. Prioritize incorrect facts or unclear action before minor grammar. For each language correction, explain why it matters to this reader. Label optional stylistic alternatives separately and preserve my level of certainty and intended politeness.
4. Stop and wait for my revision. Then compare the two attempts, identify an improvement and offer one edited version that preserves my voice and purpose. Keep the requested length; if none is specified, use 70-110 words. Explain any meaningful change rather than silently making the message stronger or more certain.
5. Close with one phrase worth reusing and a short transfer task for a different fictional reader. Wait for my attempt before providing another model.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 04: Research Ethics and Human Subjects
Original fictional case: A researcher wants to reuse participant data for a new question. The existing approval and consent materials have not been reviewed.
Language workshop: Ask a precise question
Communication goal: Clarify missing information before responding.
Language guidance: Name the exact word, fact, or requirement you need clarified. Ask one focused question at a time. Repeat your understanding and give the other person a chance to correct it.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): When you say ..., do you mean ...? / Could you clarify which ...? / So, my understanding is ... . Is that right?
Vocabulary: IRB: Institutional review board: a body that reviews covered human-subjects research under applicable requirements. / informed consent: A process of providing relevant information and obtaining voluntary agreement under applicable requirements. / secondary use: Use of data or material for a purpose beyond the original collection or primary purpose. / human subjects: People whose participation or identifiable information is involved in research under the applicable definition.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to know exactly what information is missing. Give one answer only after your partner asks a focused question; then ask them to confirm their understanding.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person uses an ambiguous word such as 'ready', 'approved', or 'urgent'. Clarify it before continuing.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Does the proposed use fall within the relevant approval and consent arrangements? Let's check with the appropriate ethics and data-governance processes before assuming reuse is permitted.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 04 · Research Ethics and Human Subjects | Adjust tone and register

START PROMPT
TASK: Match the language to the listener
1. Choose a short message or utterance from the reference and quote it exactly. Identify its purpose and likely audience. Ask me to choose a new audience: a close colleague, a decision-maker, or an external reader who may not know the jargon. Stop and wait.
2. Ask me to adapt that message for the chosen reader, keeping its facts and degree of certainty unchanged. Offer a short frame only if I request help. Wait for my attempt before showing alternatives.
3. Discuss at most three choices in my version: directness, specialist vocabulary and interpersonal tone. Explain when a direct request is clearer than extra politeness, and when an unfamiliar abbreviation needs expansion. Avoid cultural stereotypes or claims that one nationality always communicates a certain way.
4. Show two natural alternatives, such as a concise spoken version and a more explicit written version. Explain the tradeoff in each. Do not turn a request into an order, a possibility into a promise, or a pending decision into approval.
5. Ask me to respond to one realistic follow-up from the new reader, then wait. Finish by asking me to adapt the message for a second audience without losing its core meaning. Give feedback only after the attempt.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 04: Research Ethics and Human Subjects
Original fictional case: A researcher wants to reuse participant data for a new question. The existing approval and consent materials have not been reviewed.
Language workshop: Ask a precise question
Communication goal: Clarify missing information before responding.
Language guidance: Name the exact word, fact, or requirement you need clarified. Ask one focused question at a time. Repeat your understanding and give the other person a chance to correct it.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): When you say ..., do you mean ...? / Could you clarify which ...? / So, my understanding is ... . Is that right?
Vocabulary: IRB: Institutional review board: a body that reviews covered human-subjects research under applicable requirements. / informed consent: A process of providing relevant information and obtaining voluntary agreement under applicable requirements. / secondary use: Use of data or material for a purpose beyond the original collection or primary purpose. / human subjects: People whose participation or identifiable information is involved in research under the applicable definition.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to know exactly what information is missing. Give one answer only after your partner asks a focused question; then ask them to confirm their understanding.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person uses an ambiguous word such as 'ready', 'approved', or 'urgent'. Clarify it before continuing.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Does the proposed use fall within the relevant approval and consent arrangements? Let's check with the appropriate ethics and data-governance processes before assuming reuse is permitted.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 04 · Research Ethics and Human Subjects | Test recall and transfer

START PROMPT
TASK: A short retrieval session
1. Tell me to close my notes. Plan six questions: two vocabulary-in-context items, one grammar or meaning contrast, one question about a confirmed versus unknown detail, one short spoken-style response and one new-situation transfer task. Use the supplied material as the answer reference, but do not repeat its existing checks word for word.
2. Ask only the first question, then stop and wait. Prefer a short answer over a multiple-choice question. Do not display the remaining questions, model answers or a word bank in advance.
3. After each answer, say what it gets right and explain a meaningful error if there is one. Accept alternative wording when it preserves the facts and does the communication job. If I struggle, give one clue and invite a retry before revealing a model. Only then move to the next question.
4. Keep a simple record of which items I answered independently, with a hint, or after seeing a model. This records today's practice, not a certified proficiency score. Do not judge pronunciation from typed text.
5. At the end, summarize two strengths and two useful next steps with examples from my answers. Give me a small review card containing three prompts and a separate answer section. Suggest that I revisit it tomorrow and a week later; do not claim you will remember this session or send reminders. Label the final transfer scenario as fictional.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 04: Research Ethics and Human Subjects
Original fictional case: A researcher wants to reuse participant data for a new question. The existing approval and consent materials have not been reviewed.
Language workshop: Ask a precise question
Communication goal: Clarify missing information before responding.
Language guidance: Name the exact word, fact, or requirement you need clarified. Ask one focused question at a time. Repeat your understanding and give the other person a chance to correct it.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): When you say ..., do you mean ...? / Could you clarify which ...? / So, my understanding is ... . Is that right?
Vocabulary: IRB: Institutional review board: a body that reviews covered human-subjects research under applicable requirements. / informed consent: A process of providing relevant information and obtaining voluntary agreement under applicable requirements. / secondary use: Use of data or material for a purpose beyond the original collection or primary purpose. / human subjects: People whose participation or identifiable information is involved in research under the applicable definition.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to know exactly what information is missing. Give one answer only after your partner asks a focused question; then ask them to confirm their understanding.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person uses an ambiguous word such as 'ready', 'approved', or 'urgent'. Clarify it before continuing.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Does the proposed use fall within the relevant approval and consent arrangements? Let's check with the appropriate ethics and data-governance processes before assuming reuse is permitted.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 04 · Research Ethics and Human Subjects | Adapt a partner or class activity

START PROMPT
TASK: Adapt this material for a teaching session
1. Ask me one brief planning question covering learner support needs, group size and available time. Offer a default of two B2 learners and 20 minutes. Stop and wait; use the default only if I choose it.
2. Create a timed plan using the supplied case or dialogue, its actual terminology and one narrow language goal. Include an individual first attempt, partner exchange, focused feedback and a retry. Keep the total within the time I choose. State what the learner should be able to communicate at the end.
3. Provide separate role cards for two or three professional speakers. Each card needs an objective, known information and one question to resolve. Label any invented private information as a variation; do not contradict shared facts. Do not place the model answer on the learner cards.
4. Add a B1 support option with useful frames, a B2 independent task and a C1 extension involving a plausible competing constraint. Maintain the same professional meaning across levels. Explain unfamiliar terms without removing the field's normal language. Include a workable solo alternative.
5. Put teacher notes and suggested responses in a clearly separate section after the learner material. Include likely misunderstandings and a short observation checklist for facts, clarity, tone and next step. Accept multiple successful formulations. Finish with one exit question and a delayed-recall task; identify what the teacher should check before use.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 04: Research Ethics and Human Subjects
Original fictional case: A researcher wants to reuse participant data for a new question. The existing approval and consent materials have not been reviewed.
Language workshop: Ask a precise question
Communication goal: Clarify missing information before responding.
Language guidance: Name the exact word, fact, or requirement you need clarified. Ask one focused question at a time. Repeat your understanding and give the other person a chance to correct it.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): When you say ..., do you mean ...? / Could you clarify which ...? / So, my understanding is ... . Is that right?
Vocabulary: IRB: Institutional review board: a body that reviews covered human-subjects research under applicable requirements. / informed consent: A process of providing relevant information and obtaining voluntary agreement under applicable requirements. / secondary use: Use of data or material for a purpose beyond the original collection or primary purpose. / human subjects: People whose participation or identifiable information is involved in research under the applicable definition.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to know exactly what information is missing. Give one answer only after your partner asks a focused question; then ask them to confirm their understanding.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person uses an ambiguous word such as 'ready', 'approved', or 'urgent'. Clarify it before continuing.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Does the proposed use fall within the relevant approval and consent arrangements? Let's check with the appropriate ethics and data-governance processes before assuming reuse is permitted.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 05 · Authorship, Collaboration, and Credit | Build vocabulary and collocations

START PROMPT
TASK: Vocabulary in use
1. Choose four useful terms from the reference. For each, give a plain-English meaning in this field, two natural word combinations (collocations), one realistic example and a likely misuse or contrast. Keep the examples consistent with the reference and avoid jargon that does not fit this occupation.
2. Add four related terms that would be useful in a different common situation in the same field. Label these as suggested extensions, explain how they connect to the work, and flag regional or organizational variation where relevant. Do not pad the list with synonyms nobody would use at work.
3. Start a retrieval round: give one short workplace sentence with a gap and a clear clue. Ask me to supply the best term and explain my choice. Stop and wait; do not reveal the answer or a completed sentence yet. Accept another term if its meaning and collocation work.
4. After my attempt, explain one useful distinction and ask me to write my own sentence. Wait, correct a genuine meaning or usage problem, then give the next retrieval question. Work through four questions one at a time.
5. Finish with a short handoff or message task using three terms, followed by two recall questions I can save for another day. Do not pretend to schedule a reminder.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 05: Authorship, Collaboration, and Credit
Original fictional case: Collaborators disagree about authorship late in a project. Their contributions and expectations have not been discussed together.
Language workshop: Help a group reach a clear next step
Communication goal: Include relevant voices and clarify the decision process.
Language guidance: Summarize the issue neutrally, invite missing perspectives, and distinguish discussion from decision. State who can decide and record any unresolved question. Do not assume silence means agreement.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Let's hear ... before we decide. / The point we still need to resolve is ... . / Who will make this decision, and what do they need?
Vocabulary: authorship: Recognized responsibility and credit for creating a scholarly or other written work. / contribution: A person's or activity's part in producing a shared result. / corresponding author: The author designated to coordinate communication about a scholarly publication. / acknowledgment: Recognition of another person's contribution or confirmation that a message was received.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You hold a relevant concern that has not been discussed. Raise it when invited and ask who will decide. Help the facilitator state one unresolved question accurately.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: A participant interrupts or the meeting is running out of time. Protect a turn to speak and close with an accurate decision record.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could we document each contribution and review the applicable authorship criteria as a group? That will give us a clearer basis for the discussion than relying on assumptions about rank or effort.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 05 · Authorship, Collaboration, and Credit | Practice grammar in context

START PROMPT
TASK: Grammar that changes the meaning
1. For a lesson, use its language workshop as the focus. For a dialogue, quote one actual sentence and select one useful grammar feature from it, such as question word order, tense, modality, conditionals or clause linking. Explain in no more than 90 words how this feature helps the speakers do their work. Keep the grammar target narrow.
2. Give two short contrasting sentences using this workplace context. Explain the difference in time, certainty, condition or politeness. Label invented examples and preserve the distinction between possible, planned and confirmed events. Describe context-dependent choices as choices, not universal rules.
3. Give me one editing or sentence-building task using a known case fact. Do not copy the supplied editing example or reveal its answer. Ask me to explain my intended meaning. Stop and wait.
4. After I answer, quote my wording, identify at most two issues, and give a brief explanation and one hint. Ask me to revise before offering a full corrected version. Then accept any accurate, natural alternative that serves the purpose.
5. Continue with two new tasks, one at a time: first guided, then an original response without a sentence frame. End with a two-sentence workplace message using the target feature and a compact self-check. Do not replace this sequence with a worksheet and answer key.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 05: Authorship, Collaboration, and Credit
Original fictional case: Collaborators disagree about authorship late in a project. Their contributions and expectations have not been discussed together.
Language workshop: Help a group reach a clear next step
Communication goal: Include relevant voices and clarify the decision process.
Language guidance: Summarize the issue neutrally, invite missing perspectives, and distinguish discussion from decision. State who can decide and record any unresolved question. Do not assume silence means agreement.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Let's hear ... before we decide. / The point we still need to resolve is ... . / Who will make this decision, and what do they need?
Vocabulary: authorship: Recognized responsibility and credit for creating a scholarly or other written work. / contribution: A person's or activity's part in producing a shared result. / corresponding author: The author designated to coordinate communication about a scholarly publication. / acknowledgment: Recognition of another person's contribution or confirmation that a message was received.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You hold a relevant concern that has not been discussed. Raise it when invited and ask who will decide. Help the facilitator state one unresolved question accurately.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: A participant interrupts or the meeting is running out of time. Protect a turn to speak and close with an accurate decision record.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could we document each contribution and review the applicable authorship criteria as a group? That will give us a clearer basis for the discussion than relying on assumptions about rank or effort.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 05 · Authorship, Collaboration, and Credit | Rehearse with an AI colleague

START PROMPT
TASK: Interactive workplace role-play
1. Use the supplied case or dialogue as the starting situation. Give a two-sentence briefing and offer two relevant professional roles for me to choose from. For a supplied dialogue, use its actual roles. Ask which role I want, then stop and wait. Do not write my replies.
2. After I choose, identify who you will play and the immediate communication goal. Play the other professional; where a meeting requires a third person, label each of your speakers clearly. Start with one natural workplace turn and wait for my reply. Keep most turns to one to three sentences and ask no more than one question at a time.
3. Let the exchange develop across six to ten learner turns, or end earlier if I type "feedback". Respond to what I actually say. Include a plausible clarification, disagreement or tradeoff without silently changing the starting facts. Mark any added constraint as a fictional second-round variation. Do not resolve approvals, evidence or commitments that remain uncertain.
4. Stay in role during the exchange. If my meaning is unclear, ask for clarification naturally. Give a hint only if I ask or cannot proceed. Do not deliver a model conversation in advance.
5. At the debrief, quote two of my phrases: one successful choice and one worth improving. Check factual accuracy, language, register and whether the next step was clear. Give up to three focused suggestions. Ask me to retry the weakest turn; wait. Only then offer an alternative wording and a harder replay.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 05: Authorship, Collaboration, and Credit
Original fictional case: Collaborators disagree about authorship late in a project. Their contributions and expectations have not been discussed together.
Language workshop: Help a group reach a clear next step
Communication goal: Include relevant voices and clarify the decision process.
Language guidance: Summarize the issue neutrally, invite missing perspectives, and distinguish discussion from decision. State who can decide and record any unresolved question. Do not assume silence means agreement.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Let's hear ... before we decide. / The point we still need to resolve is ... . / Who will make this decision, and what do they need?
Vocabulary: authorship: Recognized responsibility and credit for creating a scholarly or other written work. / contribution: A person's or activity's part in producing a shared result. / corresponding author: The author designated to coordinate communication about a scholarly publication. / acknowledgment: Recognition of another person's contribution or confirmation that a message was received.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You hold a relevant concern that has not been discussed. Raise it when invited and ask who will decide. Help the facilitator state one unresolved question accurately.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: A participant interrupts or the meeting is running out of time. Protect a turn to speak and close with an accurate decision record.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could we document each contribution and review the applicable authorship criteria as a group? That will give us a clearer basis for the discussion than relying on assumptions about rank or effort.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 05 · Authorship, Collaboration, and Credit | Create more scenario dialogues

START PROMPT
TASK: Extend the conversation library
1. Propose six distinct, common scenarios in this field beyond the supplied case or script. For each, name the setting, two or more professional roles, the communication problem and one useful terminology focus. Include routine coordination, clarification, a complication, disagreement, handoff and follow-up where relevant. Choose scenarios that fit this profession, rather than forcing unsuitable situations into it.
2. Ask me to choose one scenario, or request all six in sequence. Stop and wait. Do not write all the scripts before I choose.
3. For the selected scenario, write an original fictional dialogue of 12-18 substantial speaking turns between two or three professionals. Name each role, establish an actual work problem, and let the exchange progress through questions, clarification, competing constraints and a credible next step or explicitly unresolved issue. Use the occupation's natural nomenclature and register. Avoid an interview between a teacher and a learner, generic small talk, and inserting a glossary definition into every reply. Explain specialist terms outside the dialogue instead.
4. After the script, explain five useful expressions in context, identify two grammar or register choices and ask three questions about the speakers' reasoning. Withhold the answers until I attempt them. Add one role-switch challenge.
5. Before presenting a script, check names, numbers, chronology, roles and terminology for consistency. Label invented facts and acknowledge uncertain specialist usage. If I requested all six, deliver one complete script at a time and wait for "next". Make each scenario materially different.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 05: Authorship, Collaboration, and Credit
Original fictional case: Collaborators disagree about authorship late in a project. Their contributions and expectations have not been discussed together.
Language workshop: Help a group reach a clear next step
Communication goal: Include relevant voices and clarify the decision process.
Language guidance: Summarize the issue neutrally, invite missing perspectives, and distinguish discussion from decision. State who can decide and record any unresolved question. Do not assume silence means agreement.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Let's hear ... before we decide. / The point we still need to resolve is ... . / Who will make this decision, and what do they need?
Vocabulary: authorship: Recognized responsibility and credit for creating a scholarly or other written work. / contribution: A person's or activity's part in producing a shared result. / corresponding author: The author designated to coordinate communication about a scholarly publication. / acknowledgment: Recognition of another person's contribution or confirmation that a message was received.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You hold a relevant concern that has not been discussed. Raise it when invited and ask who will decide. Help the facilitator state one unresolved question accurately.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: A participant interrupts or the meeting is running out of time. Protect a turn to speak and close with an accurate decision record.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could we document each contribution and review the applicable authorship criteria as a group? That will give us a clearer basis for the discussion than relying on assumptions about rank or effort.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 05 · Authorship, Collaboration, and Credit | Get feedback on a draft

START PROMPT
TASK: Coach my workplace writing
1. Ask me to paste my own fictional or anonymized draft and identify its reader and purpose. If the reference gives a writing task, mention that task as the default. If it is a dialogue, suggest a brief follow-up message that records its outcome and open questions. Stop and wait. Do not write the message for me first.
2. Once I supply the draft, check it against the reference. If an ambiguity changes the meaning, ask one focused question before rewriting. Do not assume that the draft is correct evidence for a new deadline, approval, diagnosis, cost or commitment.
3. Give feedback in three parts: one effective phrase with a reason; up to three priority improvements, quoting my words; and one short revision task for me. Prioritize incorrect facts or unclear action before minor grammar. For each language correction, explain why it matters to this reader. Label optional stylistic alternatives separately and preserve my level of certainty and intended politeness.
4. Stop and wait for my revision. Then compare the two attempts, identify an improvement and offer one edited version that preserves my voice and purpose. Keep the requested length; if none is specified, use 70-110 words. Explain any meaningful change rather than silently making the message stronger or more certain.
5. Close with one phrase worth reusing and a short transfer task for a different fictional reader. Wait for my attempt before providing another model.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 05: Authorship, Collaboration, and Credit
Original fictional case: Collaborators disagree about authorship late in a project. Their contributions and expectations have not been discussed together.
Language workshop: Help a group reach a clear next step
Communication goal: Include relevant voices and clarify the decision process.
Language guidance: Summarize the issue neutrally, invite missing perspectives, and distinguish discussion from decision. State who can decide and record any unresolved question. Do not assume silence means agreement.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Let's hear ... before we decide. / The point we still need to resolve is ... . / Who will make this decision, and what do they need?
Vocabulary: authorship: Recognized responsibility and credit for creating a scholarly or other written work. / contribution: A person's or activity's part in producing a shared result. / corresponding author: The author designated to coordinate communication about a scholarly publication. / acknowledgment: Recognition of another person's contribution or confirmation that a message was received.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You hold a relevant concern that has not been discussed. Raise it when invited and ask who will decide. Help the facilitator state one unresolved question accurately.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: A participant interrupts or the meeting is running out of time. Protect a turn to speak and close with an accurate decision record.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could we document each contribution and review the applicable authorship criteria as a group? That will give us a clearer basis for the discussion than relying on assumptions about rank or effort.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 05 · Authorship, Collaboration, and Credit | Adjust tone and register

START PROMPT
TASK: Match the language to the listener
1. Choose a short message or utterance from the reference and quote it exactly. Identify its purpose and likely audience. Ask me to choose a new audience: a close colleague, a decision-maker, or an external reader who may not know the jargon. Stop and wait.
2. Ask me to adapt that message for the chosen reader, keeping its facts and degree of certainty unchanged. Offer a short frame only if I request help. Wait for my attempt before showing alternatives.
3. Discuss at most three choices in my version: directness, specialist vocabulary and interpersonal tone. Explain when a direct request is clearer than extra politeness, and when an unfamiliar abbreviation needs expansion. Avoid cultural stereotypes or claims that one nationality always communicates a certain way.
4. Show two natural alternatives, such as a concise spoken version and a more explicit written version. Explain the tradeoff in each. Do not turn a request into an order, a possibility into a promise, or a pending decision into approval.
5. Ask me to respond to one realistic follow-up from the new reader, then wait. Finish by asking me to adapt the message for a second audience without losing its core meaning. Give feedback only after the attempt.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 05: Authorship, Collaboration, and Credit
Original fictional case: Collaborators disagree about authorship late in a project. Their contributions and expectations have not been discussed together.
Language workshop: Help a group reach a clear next step
Communication goal: Include relevant voices and clarify the decision process.
Language guidance: Summarize the issue neutrally, invite missing perspectives, and distinguish discussion from decision. State who can decide and record any unresolved question. Do not assume silence means agreement.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Let's hear ... before we decide. / The point we still need to resolve is ... . / Who will make this decision, and what do they need?
Vocabulary: authorship: Recognized responsibility and credit for creating a scholarly or other written work. / contribution: A person's or activity's part in producing a shared result. / corresponding author: The author designated to coordinate communication about a scholarly publication. / acknowledgment: Recognition of another person's contribution or confirmation that a message was received.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You hold a relevant concern that has not been discussed. Raise it when invited and ask who will decide. Help the facilitator state one unresolved question accurately.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: A participant interrupts or the meeting is running out of time. Protect a turn to speak and close with an accurate decision record.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could we document each contribution and review the applicable authorship criteria as a group? That will give us a clearer basis for the discussion than relying on assumptions about rank or effort.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 05 · Authorship, Collaboration, and Credit | Test recall and transfer

START PROMPT
TASK: A short retrieval session
1. Tell me to close my notes. Plan six questions: two vocabulary-in-context items, one grammar or meaning contrast, one question about a confirmed versus unknown detail, one short spoken-style response and one new-situation transfer task. Use the supplied material as the answer reference, but do not repeat its existing checks word for word.
2. Ask only the first question, then stop and wait. Prefer a short answer over a multiple-choice question. Do not display the remaining questions, model answers or a word bank in advance.
3. After each answer, say what it gets right and explain a meaningful error if there is one. Accept alternative wording when it preserves the facts and does the communication job. If I struggle, give one clue and invite a retry before revealing a model. Only then move to the next question.
4. Keep a simple record of which items I answered independently, with a hint, or after seeing a model. This records today's practice, not a certified proficiency score. Do not judge pronunciation from typed text.
5. At the end, summarize two strengths and two useful next steps with examples from my answers. Give me a small review card containing three prompts and a separate answer section. Suggest that I revisit it tomorrow and a week later; do not claim you will remember this session or send reminders. Label the final transfer scenario as fictional.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 05: Authorship, Collaboration, and Credit
Original fictional case: Collaborators disagree about authorship late in a project. Their contributions and expectations have not been discussed together.
Language workshop: Help a group reach a clear next step
Communication goal: Include relevant voices and clarify the decision process.
Language guidance: Summarize the issue neutrally, invite missing perspectives, and distinguish discussion from decision. State who can decide and record any unresolved question. Do not assume silence means agreement.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Let's hear ... before we decide. / The point we still need to resolve is ... . / Who will make this decision, and what do they need?
Vocabulary: authorship: Recognized responsibility and credit for creating a scholarly or other written work. / contribution: A person's or activity's part in producing a shared result. / corresponding author: The author designated to coordinate communication about a scholarly publication. / acknowledgment: Recognition of another person's contribution or confirmation that a message was received.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You hold a relevant concern that has not been discussed. Raise it when invited and ask who will decide. Help the facilitator state one unresolved question accurately.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: A participant interrupts or the meeting is running out of time. Protect a turn to speak and close with an accurate decision record.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could we document each contribution and review the applicable authorship criteria as a group? That will give us a clearer basis for the discussion than relying on assumptions about rank or effort.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 05 · Authorship, Collaboration, and Credit | Adapt a partner or class activity

START PROMPT
TASK: Adapt this material for a teaching session
1. Ask me one brief planning question covering learner support needs, group size and available time. Offer a default of two B2 learners and 20 minutes. Stop and wait; use the default only if I choose it.
2. Create a timed plan using the supplied case or dialogue, its actual terminology and one narrow language goal. Include an individual first attempt, partner exchange, focused feedback and a retry. Keep the total within the time I choose. State what the learner should be able to communicate at the end.
3. Provide separate role cards for two or three professional speakers. Each card needs an objective, known information and one question to resolve. Label any invented private information as a variation; do not contradict shared facts. Do not place the model answer on the learner cards.
4. Add a B1 support option with useful frames, a B2 independent task and a C1 extension involving a plausible competing constraint. Maintain the same professional meaning across levels. Explain unfamiliar terms without removing the field's normal language. Include a workable solo alternative.
5. Put teacher notes and suggested responses in a clearly separate section after the learner material. Include likely misunderstandings and a short observation checklist for facts, clarity, tone and next step. Accept multiple successful formulations. Finish with one exit question and a delayed-recall task; identify what the teacher should check before use.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 05: Authorship, Collaboration, and Credit
Original fictional case: Collaborators disagree about authorship late in a project. Their contributions and expectations have not been discussed together.
Language workshop: Help a group reach a clear next step
Communication goal: Include relevant voices and clarify the decision process.
Language guidance: Summarize the issue neutrally, invite missing perspectives, and distinguish discussion from decision. State who can decide and record any unresolved question. Do not assume silence means agreement.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Let's hear ... before we decide. / The point we still need to resolve is ... . / Who will make this decision, and what do they need?
Vocabulary: authorship: Recognized responsibility and credit for creating a scholarly or other written work. / contribution: A person's or activity's part in producing a shared result. / corresponding author: The author designated to coordinate communication about a scholarly publication. / acknowledgment: Recognition of another person's contribution or confirmation that a message was received.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You hold a relevant concern that has not been discussed. Raise it when invited and ask who will decide. Help the facilitator state one unresolved question accurately.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: A participant interrupts or the meeting is running out of time. Protect a turn to speak and close with an accurate decision record.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could we document each contribution and review the applicable authorship criteria as a group? That will give us a clearer basis for the discussion than relying on assumptions about rank or effort.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 06 · Peer Review and Revision Responses | Build vocabulary and collocations

START PROMPT
TASK: Vocabulary in use
1. Choose four useful terms from the reference. For each, give a plain-English meaning in this field, two natural word combinations (collocations), one realistic example and a likely misuse or contrast. Keep the examples consistent with the reference and avoid jargon that does not fit this occupation.
2. Add four related terms that would be useful in a different common situation in the same field. Label these as suggested extensions, explain how they connect to the work, and flag regional or organizational variation where relevant. Do not pad the list with synonyms nobody would use at work.
3. Start a retrieval round: give one short workplace sentence with a gap and a clear clue. Ask me to supply the best term and explain my choice. Stop and wait; do not reveal the answer or a completed sentence yet. Accept another term if its meaning and collocation work.
4. After my attempt, explain one useful distinction and ask me to write my own sentence. Wait, correct a genuine meaning or usage problem, then give the next retrieval question. Work through four questions one at a time.
5. Finish with a short handoff or message task using three terms, followed by two recall questions I can save for another day. Do not pretend to schedule a reminder.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 06: Peer Review and Revision Responses
Original fictional case: A reviewer points out that a manuscript's claim goes beyond its sample. The authors agree that the wording needs revision.
Language workshop: Repair a misunderstanding
Communication goal: Acknowledge a communication problem and give a corrected message.
Language guidance: Name what was unclear or wrong, acknowledge its effect, and correct it. A brief apology can help, followed by a practical next step. Avoid explaining away the other person's reaction or promising an outcome you cannot control.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): My earlier message did not make ... clear. / I'm sorry for ... . The correct information is ... . / Let me check that the revised explanation addresses ... .
Vocabulary: peer review: Evaluation of scholarly work by others with relevant expertise. / major revision: A publication decision requiring substantial changes before a manuscript is reconsidered. / response letter: A document replying to comments or questions and explaining the changes or reasoning. / scope: Defined boundary of work, responsibility, deliverables, assumptions, and exclusions.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You are frustrated because an earlier message created an expectation. Explain that expectation. Ask your partner to distinguish the correction from anything still uncertain.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The listener remains disappointed after the correction. Acknowledge the impact and restate the available next step calmly.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Thank you for identifying this limitation. We have narrowed the claim to the studied sample and added a discussion of generalizability. The response should point the reviewer to the revised passage.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 06 · Peer Review and Revision Responses | Practice grammar in context

START PROMPT
TASK: Grammar that changes the meaning
1. For a lesson, use its language workshop as the focus. For a dialogue, quote one actual sentence and select one useful grammar feature from it, such as question word order, tense, modality, conditionals or clause linking. Explain in no more than 90 words how this feature helps the speakers do their work. Keep the grammar target narrow.
2. Give two short contrasting sentences using this workplace context. Explain the difference in time, certainty, condition or politeness. Label invented examples and preserve the distinction between possible, planned and confirmed events. Describe context-dependent choices as choices, not universal rules.
3. Give me one editing or sentence-building task using a known case fact. Do not copy the supplied editing example or reveal its answer. Ask me to explain my intended meaning. Stop and wait.
4. After I answer, quote my wording, identify at most two issues, and give a brief explanation and one hint. Ask me to revise before offering a full corrected version. Then accept any accurate, natural alternative that serves the purpose.
5. Continue with two new tasks, one at a time: first guided, then an original response without a sentence frame. End with a two-sentence workplace message using the target feature and a compact self-check. Do not replace this sequence with a worksheet and answer key.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 06: Peer Review and Revision Responses
Original fictional case: A reviewer points out that a manuscript's claim goes beyond its sample. The authors agree that the wording needs revision.
Language workshop: Repair a misunderstanding
Communication goal: Acknowledge a communication problem and give a corrected message.
Language guidance: Name what was unclear or wrong, acknowledge its effect, and correct it. A brief apology can help, followed by a practical next step. Avoid explaining away the other person's reaction or promising an outcome you cannot control.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): My earlier message did not make ... clear. / I'm sorry for ... . The correct information is ... . / Let me check that the revised explanation addresses ... .
Vocabulary: peer review: Evaluation of scholarly work by others with relevant expertise. / major revision: A publication decision requiring substantial changes before a manuscript is reconsidered. / response letter: A document replying to comments or questions and explaining the changes or reasoning. / scope: Defined boundary of work, responsibility, deliverables, assumptions, and exclusions.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You are frustrated because an earlier message created an expectation. Explain that expectation. Ask your partner to distinguish the correction from anything still uncertain.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The listener remains disappointed after the correction. Acknowledge the impact and restate the available next step calmly.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Thank you for identifying this limitation. We have narrowed the claim to the studied sample and added a discussion of generalizability. The response should point the reviewer to the revised passage.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 06 · Peer Review and Revision Responses | Rehearse with an AI colleague

START PROMPT
TASK: Interactive workplace role-play
1. Use the supplied case or dialogue as the starting situation. Give a two-sentence briefing and offer two relevant professional roles for me to choose from. For a supplied dialogue, use its actual roles. Ask which role I want, then stop and wait. Do not write my replies.
2. After I choose, identify who you will play and the immediate communication goal. Play the other professional; where a meeting requires a third person, label each of your speakers clearly. Start with one natural workplace turn and wait for my reply. Keep most turns to one to three sentences and ask no more than one question at a time.
3. Let the exchange develop across six to ten learner turns, or end earlier if I type "feedback". Respond to what I actually say. Include a plausible clarification, disagreement or tradeoff without silently changing the starting facts. Mark any added constraint as a fictional second-round variation. Do not resolve approvals, evidence or commitments that remain uncertain.
4. Stay in role during the exchange. If my meaning is unclear, ask for clarification naturally. Give a hint only if I ask or cannot proceed. Do not deliver a model conversation in advance.
5. At the debrief, quote two of my phrases: one successful choice and one worth improving. Check factual accuracy, language, register and whether the next step was clear. Give up to three focused suggestions. Ask me to retry the weakest turn; wait. Only then offer an alternative wording and a harder replay.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 06: Peer Review and Revision Responses
Original fictional case: A reviewer points out that a manuscript's claim goes beyond its sample. The authors agree that the wording needs revision.
Language workshop: Repair a misunderstanding
Communication goal: Acknowledge a communication problem and give a corrected message.
Language guidance: Name what was unclear or wrong, acknowledge its effect, and correct it. A brief apology can help, followed by a practical next step. Avoid explaining away the other person's reaction or promising an outcome you cannot control.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): My earlier message did not make ... clear. / I'm sorry for ... . The correct information is ... . / Let me check that the revised explanation addresses ... .
Vocabulary: peer review: Evaluation of scholarly work by others with relevant expertise. / major revision: A publication decision requiring substantial changes before a manuscript is reconsidered. / response letter: A document replying to comments or questions and explaining the changes or reasoning. / scope: Defined boundary of work, responsibility, deliverables, assumptions, and exclusions.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You are frustrated because an earlier message created an expectation. Explain that expectation. Ask your partner to distinguish the correction from anything still uncertain.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The listener remains disappointed after the correction. Acknowledge the impact and restate the available next step calmly.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Thank you for identifying this limitation. We have narrowed the claim to the studied sample and added a discussion of generalizability. The response should point the reviewer to the revised passage.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 06 · Peer Review and Revision Responses | Create more scenario dialogues

START PROMPT
TASK: Extend the conversation library
1. Propose six distinct, common scenarios in this field beyond the supplied case or script. For each, name the setting, two or more professional roles, the communication problem and one useful terminology focus. Include routine coordination, clarification, a complication, disagreement, handoff and follow-up where relevant. Choose scenarios that fit this profession, rather than forcing unsuitable situations into it.
2. Ask me to choose one scenario, or request all six in sequence. Stop and wait. Do not write all the scripts before I choose.
3. For the selected scenario, write an original fictional dialogue of 12-18 substantial speaking turns between two or three professionals. Name each role, establish an actual work problem, and let the exchange progress through questions, clarification, competing constraints and a credible next step or explicitly unresolved issue. Use the occupation's natural nomenclature and register. Avoid an interview between a teacher and a learner, generic small talk, and inserting a glossary definition into every reply. Explain specialist terms outside the dialogue instead.
4. After the script, explain five useful expressions in context, identify two grammar or register choices and ask three questions about the speakers' reasoning. Withhold the answers until I attempt them. Add one role-switch challenge.
5. Before presenting a script, check names, numbers, chronology, roles and terminology for consistency. Label invented facts and acknowledge uncertain specialist usage. If I requested all six, deliver one complete script at a time and wait for "next". Make each scenario materially different.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 06: Peer Review and Revision Responses
Original fictional case: A reviewer points out that a manuscript's claim goes beyond its sample. The authors agree that the wording needs revision.
Language workshop: Repair a misunderstanding
Communication goal: Acknowledge a communication problem and give a corrected message.
Language guidance: Name what was unclear or wrong, acknowledge its effect, and correct it. A brief apology can help, followed by a practical next step. Avoid explaining away the other person's reaction or promising an outcome you cannot control.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): My earlier message did not make ... clear. / I'm sorry for ... . The correct information is ... . / Let me check that the revised explanation addresses ... .
Vocabulary: peer review: Evaluation of scholarly work by others with relevant expertise. / major revision: A publication decision requiring substantial changes before a manuscript is reconsidered. / response letter: A document replying to comments or questions and explaining the changes or reasoning. / scope: Defined boundary of work, responsibility, deliverables, assumptions, and exclusions.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You are frustrated because an earlier message created an expectation. Explain that expectation. Ask your partner to distinguish the correction from anything still uncertain.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The listener remains disappointed after the correction. Acknowledge the impact and restate the available next step calmly.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Thank you for identifying this limitation. We have narrowed the claim to the studied sample and added a discussion of generalizability. The response should point the reviewer to the revised passage.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 06 · Peer Review and Revision Responses | Get feedback on a draft

START PROMPT
TASK: Coach my workplace writing
1. Ask me to paste my own fictional or anonymized draft and identify its reader and purpose. If the reference gives a writing task, mention that task as the default. If it is a dialogue, suggest a brief follow-up message that records its outcome and open questions. Stop and wait. Do not write the message for me first.
2. Once I supply the draft, check it against the reference. If an ambiguity changes the meaning, ask one focused question before rewriting. Do not assume that the draft is correct evidence for a new deadline, approval, diagnosis, cost or commitment.
3. Give feedback in three parts: one effective phrase with a reason; up to three priority improvements, quoting my words; and one short revision task for me. Prioritize incorrect facts or unclear action before minor grammar. For each language correction, explain why it matters to this reader. Label optional stylistic alternatives separately and preserve my level of certainty and intended politeness.
4. Stop and wait for my revision. Then compare the two attempts, identify an improvement and offer one edited version that preserves my voice and purpose. Keep the requested length; if none is specified, use 70-110 words. Explain any meaningful change rather than silently making the message stronger or more certain.
5. Close with one phrase worth reusing and a short transfer task for a different fictional reader. Wait for my attempt before providing another model.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 06: Peer Review and Revision Responses
Original fictional case: A reviewer points out that a manuscript's claim goes beyond its sample. The authors agree that the wording needs revision.
Language workshop: Repair a misunderstanding
Communication goal: Acknowledge a communication problem and give a corrected message.
Language guidance: Name what was unclear or wrong, acknowledge its effect, and correct it. A brief apology can help, followed by a practical next step. Avoid explaining away the other person's reaction or promising an outcome you cannot control.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): My earlier message did not make ... clear. / I'm sorry for ... . The correct information is ... . / Let me check that the revised explanation addresses ... .
Vocabulary: peer review: Evaluation of scholarly work by others with relevant expertise. / major revision: A publication decision requiring substantial changes before a manuscript is reconsidered. / response letter: A document replying to comments or questions and explaining the changes or reasoning. / scope: Defined boundary of work, responsibility, deliverables, assumptions, and exclusions.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You are frustrated because an earlier message created an expectation. Explain that expectation. Ask your partner to distinguish the correction from anything still uncertain.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The listener remains disappointed after the correction. Acknowledge the impact and restate the available next step calmly.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Thank you for identifying this limitation. We have narrowed the claim to the studied sample and added a discussion of generalizability. The response should point the reviewer to the revised passage.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 06 · Peer Review and Revision Responses | Adjust tone and register

START PROMPT
TASK: Match the language to the listener
1. Choose a short message or utterance from the reference and quote it exactly. Identify its purpose and likely audience. Ask me to choose a new audience: a close colleague, a decision-maker, or an external reader who may not know the jargon. Stop and wait.
2. Ask me to adapt that message for the chosen reader, keeping its facts and degree of certainty unchanged. Offer a short frame only if I request help. Wait for my attempt before showing alternatives.
3. Discuss at most three choices in my version: directness, specialist vocabulary and interpersonal tone. Explain when a direct request is clearer than extra politeness, and when an unfamiliar abbreviation needs expansion. Avoid cultural stereotypes or claims that one nationality always communicates a certain way.
4. Show two natural alternatives, such as a concise spoken version and a more explicit written version. Explain the tradeoff in each. Do not turn a request into an order, a possibility into a promise, or a pending decision into approval.
5. Ask me to respond to one realistic follow-up from the new reader, then wait. Finish by asking me to adapt the message for a second audience without losing its core meaning. Give feedback only after the attempt.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 06: Peer Review and Revision Responses
Original fictional case: A reviewer points out that a manuscript's claim goes beyond its sample. The authors agree that the wording needs revision.
Language workshop: Repair a misunderstanding
Communication goal: Acknowledge a communication problem and give a corrected message.
Language guidance: Name what was unclear or wrong, acknowledge its effect, and correct it. A brief apology can help, followed by a practical next step. Avoid explaining away the other person's reaction or promising an outcome you cannot control.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): My earlier message did not make ... clear. / I'm sorry for ... . The correct information is ... . / Let me check that the revised explanation addresses ... .
Vocabulary: peer review: Evaluation of scholarly work by others with relevant expertise. / major revision: A publication decision requiring substantial changes before a manuscript is reconsidered. / response letter: A document replying to comments or questions and explaining the changes or reasoning. / scope: Defined boundary of work, responsibility, deliverables, assumptions, and exclusions.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You are frustrated because an earlier message created an expectation. Explain that expectation. Ask your partner to distinguish the correction from anything still uncertain.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The listener remains disappointed after the correction. Acknowledge the impact and restate the available next step calmly.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Thank you for identifying this limitation. We have narrowed the claim to the studied sample and added a discussion of generalizability. The response should point the reviewer to the revised passage.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 06 · Peer Review and Revision Responses | Test recall and transfer

START PROMPT
TASK: A short retrieval session
1. Tell me to close my notes. Plan six questions: two vocabulary-in-context items, one grammar or meaning contrast, one question about a confirmed versus unknown detail, one short spoken-style response and one new-situation transfer task. Use the supplied material as the answer reference, but do not repeat its existing checks word for word.
2. Ask only the first question, then stop and wait. Prefer a short answer over a multiple-choice question. Do not display the remaining questions, model answers or a word bank in advance.
3. After each answer, say what it gets right and explain a meaningful error if there is one. Accept alternative wording when it preserves the facts and does the communication job. If I struggle, give one clue and invite a retry before revealing a model. Only then move to the next question.
4. Keep a simple record of which items I answered independently, with a hint, or after seeing a model. This records today's practice, not a certified proficiency score. Do not judge pronunciation from typed text.
5. At the end, summarize two strengths and two useful next steps with examples from my answers. Give me a small review card containing three prompts and a separate answer section. Suggest that I revisit it tomorrow and a week later; do not claim you will remember this session or send reminders. Label the final transfer scenario as fictional.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 06: Peer Review and Revision Responses
Original fictional case: A reviewer points out that a manuscript's claim goes beyond its sample. The authors agree that the wording needs revision.
Language workshop: Repair a misunderstanding
Communication goal: Acknowledge a communication problem and give a corrected message.
Language guidance: Name what was unclear or wrong, acknowledge its effect, and correct it. A brief apology can help, followed by a practical next step. Avoid explaining away the other person's reaction or promising an outcome you cannot control.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): My earlier message did not make ... clear. / I'm sorry for ... . The correct information is ... . / Let me check that the revised explanation addresses ... .
Vocabulary: peer review: Evaluation of scholarly work by others with relevant expertise. / major revision: A publication decision requiring substantial changes before a manuscript is reconsidered. / response letter: A document replying to comments or questions and explaining the changes or reasoning. / scope: Defined boundary of work, responsibility, deliverables, assumptions, and exclusions.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You are frustrated because an earlier message created an expectation. Explain that expectation. Ask your partner to distinguish the correction from anything still uncertain.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The listener remains disappointed after the correction. Acknowledge the impact and restate the available next step calmly.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Thank you for identifying this limitation. We have narrowed the claim to the studied sample and added a discussion of generalizability. The response should point the reviewer to the revised passage.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 06 · Peer Review and Revision Responses | Adapt a partner or class activity

START PROMPT
TASK: Adapt this material for a teaching session
1. Ask me one brief planning question covering learner support needs, group size and available time. Offer a default of two B2 learners and 20 minutes. Stop and wait; use the default only if I choose it.
2. Create a timed plan using the supplied case or dialogue, its actual terminology and one narrow language goal. Include an individual first attempt, partner exchange, focused feedback and a retry. Keep the total within the time I choose. State what the learner should be able to communicate at the end.
3. Provide separate role cards for two or three professional speakers. Each card needs an objective, known information and one question to resolve. Label any invented private information as a variation; do not contradict shared facts. Do not place the model answer on the learner cards.
4. Add a B1 support option with useful frames, a B2 independent task and a C1 extension involving a plausible competing constraint. Maintain the same professional meaning across levels. Explain unfamiliar terms without removing the field's normal language. Include a workable solo alternative.
5. Put teacher notes and suggested responses in a clearly separate section after the learner material. Include likely misunderstandings and a short observation checklist for facts, clarity, tone and next step. Accept multiple successful formulations. Finish with one exit question and a delayed-recall task; identify what the teacher should check before use.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 06: Peer Review and Revision Responses
Original fictional case: A reviewer points out that a manuscript's claim goes beyond its sample. The authors agree that the wording needs revision.
Language workshop: Repair a misunderstanding
Communication goal: Acknowledge a communication problem and give a corrected message.
Language guidance: Name what was unclear or wrong, acknowledge its effect, and correct it. A brief apology can help, followed by a practical next step. Avoid explaining away the other person's reaction or promising an outcome you cannot control.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): My earlier message did not make ... clear. / I'm sorry for ... . The correct information is ... . / Let me check that the revised explanation addresses ... .
Vocabulary: peer review: Evaluation of scholarly work by others with relevant expertise. / major revision: A publication decision requiring substantial changes before a manuscript is reconsidered. / response letter: A document replying to comments or questions and explaining the changes or reasoning. / scope: Defined boundary of work, responsibility, deliverables, assumptions, and exclusions.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You are frustrated because an earlier message created an expectation. Explain that expectation. Ask your partner to distinguish the correction from anything still uncertain.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The listener remains disappointed after the correction. Acknowledge the impact and restate the available next step calmly.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Thank you for identifying this limitation. We have narrowed the claim to the studied sample and added a discussion of generalizability. The response should point the reviewer to the revised passage.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 07 · Data Management and Reproducibility | Build vocabulary and collocations

START PROMPT
TASK: Vocabulary in use
1. Choose four useful terms from the reference. For each, give a plain-English meaning in this field, two natural word combinations (collocations), one realistic example and a likely misuse or contrast. Keep the examples consistent with the reference and avoid jargon that does not fit this occupation.
2. Add four related terms that would be useful in a different common situation in the same field. Label these as suggested extensions, explain how they connect to the work, and flag regional or organizational variation where relevant. Do not pad the list with synonyms nobody would use at work.
3. Start a retrieval round: give one short workplace sentence with a gap and a clear clue. Ask me to supply the best term and explain my choice. Stop and wait; do not reveal the answer or a completed sentence yet. Accept another term if its meaning and collocation work.
4. After my attempt, explain one useful distinction and ask me to write my own sentence. Wait, correct a genuine meaning or usage problem, then give the next retrieval question. Work through four questions one at a time.
5. Finish with a short handoff or message task using three terms, followed by two recall questions I can save for another day. Do not pretend to schedule a reminder.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 07: Data Management and Reproducibility
Original fictional case: A shared dataset has variable names but no description of units, missing values, or collection dates.
Language workshop: Ask for an actionable next step
Communication goal: Make a request with a clear action, purpose, and realistic timing.
Language guidance: State the action and the information needed. Explain why it matters and specify a deadline only when one is given or agreed. 'Could you' is polite; repeated apologies can obscure a legitimate request. Urgent situations may require a direct request.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Could you provide ... so that ...? / Please confirm ... by [agreed time]. / If that timing is not possible, please let me know ... .
Vocabulary: metadata: Information describing data, such as its source, units, dates, and structure. / repository: A managed location for storing and accessing data, documents, or code. / provenance: The documented origin and history of data or an item. / reproducibility: Obtaining consistent results using the same data and methods; conventions vary by research field.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You can help but need a clear request and its purpose. Ask what is required and whether the timing is fixed or negotiable.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person cannot meet the requested timing. Clarify an alternative without inventing authority to change a formal deadline.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could you add a data dictionary covering units, missing-value codes, and collection dates? Those details will help another researcher interpret and reuse the data correctly.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 07 · Data Management and Reproducibility | Practice grammar in context

START PROMPT
TASK: Grammar that changes the meaning
1. For a lesson, use its language workshop as the focus. For a dialogue, quote one actual sentence and select one useful grammar feature from it, such as question word order, tense, modality, conditionals or clause linking. Explain in no more than 90 words how this feature helps the speakers do their work. Keep the grammar target narrow.
2. Give two short contrasting sentences using this workplace context. Explain the difference in time, certainty, condition or politeness. Label invented examples and preserve the distinction between possible, planned and confirmed events. Describe context-dependent choices as choices, not universal rules.
3. Give me one editing or sentence-building task using a known case fact. Do not copy the supplied editing example or reveal its answer. Ask me to explain my intended meaning. Stop and wait.
4. After I answer, quote my wording, identify at most two issues, and give a brief explanation and one hint. Ask me to revise before offering a full corrected version. Then accept any accurate, natural alternative that serves the purpose.
5. Continue with two new tasks, one at a time: first guided, then an original response without a sentence frame. End with a two-sentence workplace message using the target feature and a compact self-check. Do not replace this sequence with a worksheet and answer key.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 07: Data Management and Reproducibility
Original fictional case: A shared dataset has variable names but no description of units, missing values, or collection dates.
Language workshop: Ask for an actionable next step
Communication goal: Make a request with a clear action, purpose, and realistic timing.
Language guidance: State the action and the information needed. Explain why it matters and specify a deadline only when one is given or agreed. 'Could you' is polite; repeated apologies can obscure a legitimate request. Urgent situations may require a direct request.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Could you provide ... so that ...? / Please confirm ... by [agreed time]. / If that timing is not possible, please let me know ... .
Vocabulary: metadata: Information describing data, such as its source, units, dates, and structure. / repository: A managed location for storing and accessing data, documents, or code. / provenance: The documented origin and history of data or an item. / reproducibility: Obtaining consistent results using the same data and methods; conventions vary by research field.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You can help but need a clear request and its purpose. Ask what is required and whether the timing is fixed or negotiable.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person cannot meet the requested timing. Clarify an alternative without inventing authority to change a formal deadline.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could you add a data dictionary covering units, missing-value codes, and collection dates? Those details will help another researcher interpret and reuse the data correctly.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 07 · Data Management and Reproducibility | Rehearse with an AI colleague

START PROMPT
TASK: Interactive workplace role-play
1. Use the supplied case or dialogue as the starting situation. Give a two-sentence briefing and offer two relevant professional roles for me to choose from. For a supplied dialogue, use its actual roles. Ask which role I want, then stop and wait. Do not write my replies.
2. After I choose, identify who you will play and the immediate communication goal. Play the other professional; where a meeting requires a third person, label each of your speakers clearly. Start with one natural workplace turn and wait for my reply. Keep most turns to one to three sentences and ask no more than one question at a time.
3. Let the exchange develop across six to ten learner turns, or end earlier if I type "feedback". Respond to what I actually say. Include a plausible clarification, disagreement or tradeoff without silently changing the starting facts. Mark any added constraint as a fictional second-round variation. Do not resolve approvals, evidence or commitments that remain uncertain.
4. Stay in role during the exchange. If my meaning is unclear, ask for clarification naturally. Give a hint only if I ask or cannot proceed. Do not deliver a model conversation in advance.
5. At the debrief, quote two of my phrases: one successful choice and one worth improving. Check factual accuracy, language, register and whether the next step was clear. Give up to three focused suggestions. Ask me to retry the weakest turn; wait. Only then offer an alternative wording and a harder replay.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 07: Data Management and Reproducibility
Original fictional case: A shared dataset has variable names but no description of units, missing values, or collection dates.
Language workshop: Ask for an actionable next step
Communication goal: Make a request with a clear action, purpose, and realistic timing.
Language guidance: State the action and the information needed. Explain why it matters and specify a deadline only when one is given or agreed. 'Could you' is polite; repeated apologies can obscure a legitimate request. Urgent situations may require a direct request.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Could you provide ... so that ...? / Please confirm ... by [agreed time]. / If that timing is not possible, please let me know ... .
Vocabulary: metadata: Information describing data, such as its source, units, dates, and structure. / repository: A managed location for storing and accessing data, documents, or code. / provenance: The documented origin and history of data or an item. / reproducibility: Obtaining consistent results using the same data and methods; conventions vary by research field.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You can help but need a clear request and its purpose. Ask what is required and whether the timing is fixed or negotiable.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person cannot meet the requested timing. Clarify an alternative without inventing authority to change a formal deadline.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could you add a data dictionary covering units, missing-value codes, and collection dates? Those details will help another researcher interpret and reuse the data correctly.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 07 · Data Management and Reproducibility | Create more scenario dialogues

START PROMPT
TASK: Extend the conversation library
1. Propose six distinct, common scenarios in this field beyond the supplied case or script. For each, name the setting, two or more professional roles, the communication problem and one useful terminology focus. Include routine coordination, clarification, a complication, disagreement, handoff and follow-up where relevant. Choose scenarios that fit this profession, rather than forcing unsuitable situations into it.
2. Ask me to choose one scenario, or request all six in sequence. Stop and wait. Do not write all the scripts before I choose.
3. For the selected scenario, write an original fictional dialogue of 12-18 substantial speaking turns between two or three professionals. Name each role, establish an actual work problem, and let the exchange progress through questions, clarification, competing constraints and a credible next step or explicitly unresolved issue. Use the occupation's natural nomenclature and register. Avoid an interview between a teacher and a learner, generic small talk, and inserting a glossary definition into every reply. Explain specialist terms outside the dialogue instead.
4. After the script, explain five useful expressions in context, identify two grammar or register choices and ask three questions about the speakers' reasoning. Withhold the answers until I attempt them. Add one role-switch challenge.
5. Before presenting a script, check names, numbers, chronology, roles and terminology for consistency. Label invented facts and acknowledge uncertain specialist usage. If I requested all six, deliver one complete script at a time and wait for "next". Make each scenario materially different.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 07: Data Management and Reproducibility
Original fictional case: A shared dataset has variable names but no description of units, missing values, or collection dates.
Language workshop: Ask for an actionable next step
Communication goal: Make a request with a clear action, purpose, and realistic timing.
Language guidance: State the action and the information needed. Explain why it matters and specify a deadline only when one is given or agreed. 'Could you' is polite; repeated apologies can obscure a legitimate request. Urgent situations may require a direct request.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Could you provide ... so that ...? / Please confirm ... by [agreed time]. / If that timing is not possible, please let me know ... .
Vocabulary: metadata: Information describing data, such as its source, units, dates, and structure. / repository: A managed location for storing and accessing data, documents, or code. / provenance: The documented origin and history of data or an item. / reproducibility: Obtaining consistent results using the same data and methods; conventions vary by research field.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You can help but need a clear request and its purpose. Ask what is required and whether the timing is fixed or negotiable.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person cannot meet the requested timing. Clarify an alternative without inventing authority to change a formal deadline.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could you add a data dictionary covering units, missing-value codes, and collection dates? Those details will help another researcher interpret and reuse the data correctly.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 07 · Data Management and Reproducibility | Get feedback on a draft

START PROMPT
TASK: Coach my workplace writing
1. Ask me to paste my own fictional or anonymized draft and identify its reader and purpose. If the reference gives a writing task, mention that task as the default. If it is a dialogue, suggest a brief follow-up message that records its outcome and open questions. Stop and wait. Do not write the message for me first.
2. Once I supply the draft, check it against the reference. If an ambiguity changes the meaning, ask one focused question before rewriting. Do not assume that the draft is correct evidence for a new deadline, approval, diagnosis, cost or commitment.
3. Give feedback in three parts: one effective phrase with a reason; up to three priority improvements, quoting my words; and one short revision task for me. Prioritize incorrect facts or unclear action before minor grammar. For each language correction, explain why it matters to this reader. Label optional stylistic alternatives separately and preserve my level of certainty and intended politeness.
4. Stop and wait for my revision. Then compare the two attempts, identify an improvement and offer one edited version that preserves my voice and purpose. Keep the requested length; if none is specified, use 70-110 words. Explain any meaningful change rather than silently making the message stronger or more certain.
5. Close with one phrase worth reusing and a short transfer task for a different fictional reader. Wait for my attempt before providing another model.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 07: Data Management and Reproducibility
Original fictional case: A shared dataset has variable names but no description of units, missing values, or collection dates.
Language workshop: Ask for an actionable next step
Communication goal: Make a request with a clear action, purpose, and realistic timing.
Language guidance: State the action and the information needed. Explain why it matters and specify a deadline only when one is given or agreed. 'Could you' is polite; repeated apologies can obscure a legitimate request. Urgent situations may require a direct request.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Could you provide ... so that ...? / Please confirm ... by [agreed time]. / If that timing is not possible, please let me know ... .
Vocabulary: metadata: Information describing data, such as its source, units, dates, and structure. / repository: A managed location for storing and accessing data, documents, or code. / provenance: The documented origin and history of data or an item. / reproducibility: Obtaining consistent results using the same data and methods; conventions vary by research field.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You can help but need a clear request and its purpose. Ask what is required and whether the timing is fixed or negotiable.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person cannot meet the requested timing. Clarify an alternative without inventing authority to change a formal deadline.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could you add a data dictionary covering units, missing-value codes, and collection dates? Those details will help another researcher interpret and reuse the data correctly.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 07 · Data Management and Reproducibility | Adjust tone and register

START PROMPT
TASK: Match the language to the listener
1. Choose a short message or utterance from the reference and quote it exactly. Identify its purpose and likely audience. Ask me to choose a new audience: a close colleague, a decision-maker, or an external reader who may not know the jargon. Stop and wait.
2. Ask me to adapt that message for the chosen reader, keeping its facts and degree of certainty unchanged. Offer a short frame only if I request help. Wait for my attempt before showing alternatives.
3. Discuss at most three choices in my version: directness, specialist vocabulary and interpersonal tone. Explain when a direct request is clearer than extra politeness, and when an unfamiliar abbreviation needs expansion. Avoid cultural stereotypes or claims that one nationality always communicates a certain way.
4. Show two natural alternatives, such as a concise spoken version and a more explicit written version. Explain the tradeoff in each. Do not turn a request into an order, a possibility into a promise, or a pending decision into approval.
5. Ask me to respond to one realistic follow-up from the new reader, then wait. Finish by asking me to adapt the message for a second audience without losing its core meaning. Give feedback only after the attempt.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 07: Data Management and Reproducibility
Original fictional case: A shared dataset has variable names but no description of units, missing values, or collection dates.
Language workshop: Ask for an actionable next step
Communication goal: Make a request with a clear action, purpose, and realistic timing.
Language guidance: State the action and the information needed. Explain why it matters and specify a deadline only when one is given or agreed. 'Could you' is polite; repeated apologies can obscure a legitimate request. Urgent situations may require a direct request.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Could you provide ... so that ...? / Please confirm ... by [agreed time]. / If that timing is not possible, please let me know ... .
Vocabulary: metadata: Information describing data, such as its source, units, dates, and structure. / repository: A managed location for storing and accessing data, documents, or code. / provenance: The documented origin and history of data or an item. / reproducibility: Obtaining consistent results using the same data and methods; conventions vary by research field.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You can help but need a clear request and its purpose. Ask what is required and whether the timing is fixed or negotiable.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person cannot meet the requested timing. Clarify an alternative without inventing authority to change a formal deadline.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could you add a data dictionary covering units, missing-value codes, and collection dates? Those details will help another researcher interpret and reuse the data correctly.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 07 · Data Management and Reproducibility | Test recall and transfer

START PROMPT
TASK: A short retrieval session
1. Tell me to close my notes. Plan six questions: two vocabulary-in-context items, one grammar or meaning contrast, one question about a confirmed versus unknown detail, one short spoken-style response and one new-situation transfer task. Use the supplied material as the answer reference, but do not repeat its existing checks word for word.
2. Ask only the first question, then stop and wait. Prefer a short answer over a multiple-choice question. Do not display the remaining questions, model answers or a word bank in advance.
3. After each answer, say what it gets right and explain a meaningful error if there is one. Accept alternative wording when it preserves the facts and does the communication job. If I struggle, give one clue and invite a retry before revealing a model. Only then move to the next question.
4. Keep a simple record of which items I answered independently, with a hint, or after seeing a model. This records today's practice, not a certified proficiency score. Do not judge pronunciation from typed text.
5. At the end, summarize two strengths and two useful next steps with examples from my answers. Give me a small review card containing three prompts and a separate answer section. Suggest that I revisit it tomorrow and a week later; do not claim you will remember this session or send reminders. Label the final transfer scenario as fictional.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 07: Data Management and Reproducibility
Original fictional case: A shared dataset has variable names but no description of units, missing values, or collection dates.
Language workshop: Ask for an actionable next step
Communication goal: Make a request with a clear action, purpose, and realistic timing.
Language guidance: State the action and the information needed. Explain why it matters and specify a deadline only when one is given or agreed. 'Could you' is polite; repeated apologies can obscure a legitimate request. Urgent situations may require a direct request.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Could you provide ... so that ...? / Please confirm ... by [agreed time]. / If that timing is not possible, please let me know ... .
Vocabulary: metadata: Information describing data, such as its source, units, dates, and structure. / repository: A managed location for storing and accessing data, documents, or code. / provenance: The documented origin and history of data or an item. / reproducibility: Obtaining consistent results using the same data and methods; conventions vary by research field.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You can help but need a clear request and its purpose. Ask what is required and whether the timing is fixed or negotiable.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person cannot meet the requested timing. Clarify an alternative without inventing authority to change a formal deadline.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could you add a data dictionary covering units, missing-value codes, and collection dates? Those details will help another researcher interpret and reuse the data correctly.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 07 · Data Management and Reproducibility | Adapt a partner or class activity

START PROMPT
TASK: Adapt this material for a teaching session
1. Ask me one brief planning question covering learner support needs, group size and available time. Offer a default of two B2 learners and 20 minutes. Stop and wait; use the default only if I choose it.
2. Create a timed plan using the supplied case or dialogue, its actual terminology and one narrow language goal. Include an individual first attempt, partner exchange, focused feedback and a retry. Keep the total within the time I choose. State what the learner should be able to communicate at the end.
3. Provide separate role cards for two or three professional speakers. Each card needs an objective, known information and one question to resolve. Label any invented private information as a variation; do not contradict shared facts. Do not place the model answer on the learner cards.
4. Add a B1 support option with useful frames, a B2 independent task and a C1 extension involving a plausible competing constraint. Maintain the same professional meaning across levels. Explain unfamiliar terms without removing the field's normal language. Include a workable solo alternative.
5. Put teacher notes and suggested responses in a clearly separate section after the learner material. Include likely misunderstandings and a short observation checklist for facts, clarity, tone and next step. Accept multiple successful formulations. Finish with one exit question and a delayed-recall task; identify what the teacher should check before use.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 07: Data Management and Reproducibility
Original fictional case: A shared dataset has variable names but no description of units, missing values, or collection dates.
Language workshop: Ask for an actionable next step
Communication goal: Make a request with a clear action, purpose, and realistic timing.
Language guidance: State the action and the information needed. Explain why it matters and specify a deadline only when one is given or agreed. 'Could you' is polite; repeated apologies can obscure a legitimate request. Urgent situations may require a direct request.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): Could you provide ... so that ...? / Please confirm ... by [agreed time]. / If that timing is not possible, please let me know ... .
Vocabulary: metadata: Information describing data, such as its source, units, dates, and structure. / repository: A managed location for storing and accessing data, documents, or code. / provenance: The documented origin and history of data or an item. / reproducibility: Obtaining consistent results using the same data and methods; conventions vary by research field.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You can help but need a clear request and its purpose. Ask what is required and whether the timing is fixed or negotiable.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: The other person cannot meet the requested timing. Clarify an alternative without inventing authority to change a formal deadline.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: Could you add a data dictionary covering units, missing-value codes, and collection dates? Those details will help another researcher interpret and reuse the data correctly.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 08 · Academic Presentations and Conferences | Build vocabulary and collocations

START PROMPT
TASK: Vocabulary in use
1. Choose four useful terms from the reference. For each, give a plain-English meaning in this field, two natural word combinations (collocations), one realistic example and a likely misuse or contrast. Keep the examples consistent with the reference and avoid jargon that does not fit this occupation.
2. Add four related terms that would be useful in a different common situation in the same field. Label these as suggested extensions, explain how they connect to the work, and flag regional or organizational variation where relevant. Do not pad the list with synonyms nobody would use at work.
3. Start a retrieval round: give one short workplace sentence with a gap and a clear clue. Ask me to supply the best term and explain my choice. Stop and wait; do not reveal the answer or a completed sentence yet. Accept another term if its meaning and collocation work.
4. After my attempt, explain one useful distinction and ask me to write my own sentence. Wait, correct a genuine meaning or usage problem, then give the next retrieval question. Work through four questions one at a time.
5. Finish with a short handoff or message task using three terms, followed by two recall questions I can save for another day. Do not pretend to schedule a reminder.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 08: Academic Presentations and Conferences
Original fictional case: An audience member asks whether a small study proves a general theory. The presenter needs a concise answer.
Language workshop: Match certainty to evidence
Communication goal: Separate observations, assumptions, and conclusions.
Language guidance: Say what the evidence shows, identify what is still unknown, and limit the conclusion to that evidence. Words such as 'may', 'suggests', and 'in this sample' are useful when the uncertainty is real. Do not soften an urgent, verified safety concern.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): The available evidence shows ... . / This may indicate ..., but ... . / We have not yet established whether ... .
Vocabulary: generalizability: The extent to which findings may apply beyond the people or conditions studied. / limitation: A condition that restricts what evidence, work, or a conclusion can establish. / future work: Further questions or activities proposed after the current study or project. / conference Q&A: The question-and-answer discussion associated with a conference presentation.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to tell a colleague what is known. Ask which part is confirmed and which part is an assumption. Challenge one statement that sounds more certain than the case supports.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: Someone asks for a yes-or-no answer when the evidence supports only a qualified answer. Be concise while preserving the uncertainty.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: The study offers evidence relevant to the theory under these conditions. It does not establish the theory in every setting. A useful next step would test whether the finding holds in a broader sample.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 08 · Academic Presentations and Conferences | Practice grammar in context

START PROMPT
TASK: Grammar that changes the meaning
1. For a lesson, use its language workshop as the focus. For a dialogue, quote one actual sentence and select one useful grammar feature from it, such as question word order, tense, modality, conditionals or clause linking. Explain in no more than 90 words how this feature helps the speakers do their work. Keep the grammar target narrow.
2. Give two short contrasting sentences using this workplace context. Explain the difference in time, certainty, condition or politeness. Label invented examples and preserve the distinction between possible, planned and confirmed events. Describe context-dependent choices as choices, not universal rules.
3. Give me one editing or sentence-building task using a known case fact. Do not copy the supplied editing example or reveal its answer. Ask me to explain my intended meaning. Stop and wait.
4. After I answer, quote my wording, identify at most two issues, and give a brief explanation and one hint. Ask me to revise before offering a full corrected version. Then accept any accurate, natural alternative that serves the purpose.
5. Continue with two new tasks, one at a time: first guided, then an original response without a sentence frame. End with a two-sentence workplace message using the target feature and a compact self-check. Do not replace this sequence with a worksheet and answer key.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 08: Academic Presentations and Conferences
Original fictional case: An audience member asks whether a small study proves a general theory. The presenter needs a concise answer.
Language workshop: Match certainty to evidence
Communication goal: Separate observations, assumptions, and conclusions.
Language guidance: Say what the evidence shows, identify what is still unknown, and limit the conclusion to that evidence. Words such as 'may', 'suggests', and 'in this sample' are useful when the uncertainty is real. Do not soften an urgent, verified safety concern.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): The available evidence shows ... . / This may indicate ..., but ... . / We have not yet established whether ... .
Vocabulary: generalizability: The extent to which findings may apply beyond the people or conditions studied. / limitation: A condition that restricts what evidence, work, or a conclusion can establish. / future work: Further questions or activities proposed after the current study or project. / conference Q&A: The question-and-answer discussion associated with a conference presentation.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to tell a colleague what is known. Ask which part is confirmed and which part is an assumption. Challenge one statement that sounds more certain than the case supports.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: Someone asks for a yes-or-no answer when the evidence supports only a qualified answer. Be concise while preserving the uncertainty.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: The study offers evidence relevant to the theory under these conditions. It does not establish the theory in every setting. A useful next step would test whether the finding holds in a broader sample.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 08 · Academic Presentations and Conferences | Rehearse with an AI colleague

START PROMPT
TASK: Interactive workplace role-play
1. Use the supplied case or dialogue as the starting situation. Give a two-sentence briefing and offer two relevant professional roles for me to choose from. For a supplied dialogue, use its actual roles. Ask which role I want, then stop and wait. Do not write my replies.
2. After I choose, identify who you will play and the immediate communication goal. Play the other professional; where a meeting requires a third person, label each of your speakers clearly. Start with one natural workplace turn and wait for my reply. Keep most turns to one to three sentences and ask no more than one question at a time.
3. Let the exchange develop across six to ten learner turns, or end earlier if I type "feedback". Respond to what I actually say. Include a plausible clarification, disagreement or tradeoff without silently changing the starting facts. Mark any added constraint as a fictional second-round variation. Do not resolve approvals, evidence or commitments that remain uncertain.
4. Stay in role during the exchange. If my meaning is unclear, ask for clarification naturally. Give a hint only if I ask or cannot proceed. Do not deliver a model conversation in advance.
5. At the debrief, quote two of my phrases: one successful choice and one worth improving. Check factual accuracy, language, register and whether the next step was clear. Give up to three focused suggestions. Ask me to retry the weakest turn; wait. Only then offer an alternative wording and a harder replay.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 08: Academic Presentations and Conferences
Original fictional case: An audience member asks whether a small study proves a general theory. The presenter needs a concise answer.
Language workshop: Match certainty to evidence
Communication goal: Separate observations, assumptions, and conclusions.
Language guidance: Say what the evidence shows, identify what is still unknown, and limit the conclusion to that evidence. Words such as 'may', 'suggests', and 'in this sample' are useful when the uncertainty is real. Do not soften an urgent, verified safety concern.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): The available evidence shows ... . / This may indicate ..., but ... . / We have not yet established whether ... .
Vocabulary: generalizability: The extent to which findings may apply beyond the people or conditions studied. / limitation: A condition that restricts what evidence, work, or a conclusion can establish. / future work: Further questions or activities proposed after the current study or project. / conference Q&A: The question-and-answer discussion associated with a conference presentation.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to tell a colleague what is known. Ask which part is confirmed and which part is an assumption. Challenge one statement that sounds more certain than the case supports.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: Someone asks for a yes-or-no answer when the evidence supports only a qualified answer. Be concise while preserving the uncertainty.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: The study offers evidence relevant to the theory under these conditions. It does not establish the theory in every setting. A useful next step would test whether the finding holds in a broader sample.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 08 · Academic Presentations and Conferences | Create more scenario dialogues

START PROMPT
TASK: Extend the conversation library
1. Propose six distinct, common scenarios in this field beyond the supplied case or script. For each, name the setting, two or more professional roles, the communication problem and one useful terminology focus. Include routine coordination, clarification, a complication, disagreement, handoff and follow-up where relevant. Choose scenarios that fit this profession, rather than forcing unsuitable situations into it.
2. Ask me to choose one scenario, or request all six in sequence. Stop and wait. Do not write all the scripts before I choose.
3. For the selected scenario, write an original fictional dialogue of 12-18 substantial speaking turns between two or three professionals. Name each role, establish an actual work problem, and let the exchange progress through questions, clarification, competing constraints and a credible next step or explicitly unresolved issue. Use the occupation's natural nomenclature and register. Avoid an interview between a teacher and a learner, generic small talk, and inserting a glossary definition into every reply. Explain specialist terms outside the dialogue instead.
4. After the script, explain five useful expressions in context, identify two grammar or register choices and ask three questions about the speakers' reasoning. Withhold the answers until I attempt them. Add one role-switch challenge.
5. Before presenting a script, check names, numbers, chronology, roles and terminology for consistency. Label invented facts and acknowledge uncertain specialist usage. If I requested all six, deliver one complete script at a time and wait for "next". Make each scenario materially different.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 08: Academic Presentations and Conferences
Original fictional case: An audience member asks whether a small study proves a general theory. The presenter needs a concise answer.
Language workshop: Match certainty to evidence
Communication goal: Separate observations, assumptions, and conclusions.
Language guidance: Say what the evidence shows, identify what is still unknown, and limit the conclusion to that evidence. Words such as 'may', 'suggests', and 'in this sample' are useful when the uncertainty is real. Do not soften an urgent, verified safety concern.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): The available evidence shows ... . / This may indicate ..., but ... . / We have not yet established whether ... .
Vocabulary: generalizability: The extent to which findings may apply beyond the people or conditions studied. / limitation: A condition that restricts what evidence, work, or a conclusion can establish. / future work: Further questions or activities proposed after the current study or project. / conference Q&A: The question-and-answer discussion associated with a conference presentation.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to tell a colleague what is known. Ask which part is confirmed and which part is an assumption. Challenge one statement that sounds more certain than the case supports.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: Someone asks for a yes-or-no answer when the evidence supports only a qualified answer. Be concise while preserving the uncertainty.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: The study offers evidence relevant to the theory under these conditions. It does not establish the theory in every setting. A useful next step would test whether the finding holds in a broader sample.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 08 · Academic Presentations and Conferences | Get feedback on a draft

START PROMPT
TASK: Coach my workplace writing
1. Ask me to paste my own fictional or anonymized draft and identify its reader and purpose. If the reference gives a writing task, mention that task as the default. If it is a dialogue, suggest a brief follow-up message that records its outcome and open questions. Stop and wait. Do not write the message for me first.
2. Once I supply the draft, check it against the reference. If an ambiguity changes the meaning, ask one focused question before rewriting. Do not assume that the draft is correct evidence for a new deadline, approval, diagnosis, cost or commitment.
3. Give feedback in three parts: one effective phrase with a reason; up to three priority improvements, quoting my words; and one short revision task for me. Prioritize incorrect facts or unclear action before minor grammar. For each language correction, explain why it matters to this reader. Label optional stylistic alternatives separately and preserve my level of certainty and intended politeness.
4. Stop and wait for my revision. Then compare the two attempts, identify an improvement and offer one edited version that preserves my voice and purpose. Keep the requested length; if none is specified, use 70-110 words. Explain any meaningful change rather than silently making the message stronger or more certain.
5. Close with one phrase worth reusing and a short transfer task for a different fictional reader. Wait for my attempt before providing another model.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 08: Academic Presentations and Conferences
Original fictional case: An audience member asks whether a small study proves a general theory. The presenter needs a concise answer.
Language workshop: Match certainty to evidence
Communication goal: Separate observations, assumptions, and conclusions.
Language guidance: Say what the evidence shows, identify what is still unknown, and limit the conclusion to that evidence. Words such as 'may', 'suggests', and 'in this sample' are useful when the uncertainty is real. Do not soften an urgent, verified safety concern.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): The available evidence shows ... . / This may indicate ..., but ... . / We have not yet established whether ... .
Vocabulary: generalizability: The extent to which findings may apply beyond the people or conditions studied. / limitation: A condition that restricts what evidence, work, or a conclusion can establish. / future work: Further questions or activities proposed after the current study or project. / conference Q&A: The question-and-answer discussion associated with a conference presentation.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to tell a colleague what is known. Ask which part is confirmed and which part is an assumption. Challenge one statement that sounds more certain than the case supports.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: Someone asks for a yes-or-no answer when the evidence supports only a qualified answer. Be concise while preserving the uncertainty.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: The study offers evidence relevant to the theory under these conditions. It does not establish the theory in every setting. A useful next step would test whether the finding holds in a broader sample.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 08 · Academic Presentations and Conferences | Adjust tone and register

START PROMPT
TASK: Match the language to the listener
1. Choose a short message or utterance from the reference and quote it exactly. Identify its purpose and likely audience. Ask me to choose a new audience: a close colleague, a decision-maker, or an external reader who may not know the jargon. Stop and wait.
2. Ask me to adapt that message for the chosen reader, keeping its facts and degree of certainty unchanged. Offer a short frame only if I request help. Wait for my attempt before showing alternatives.
3. Discuss at most three choices in my version: directness, specialist vocabulary and interpersonal tone. Explain when a direct request is clearer than extra politeness, and when an unfamiliar abbreviation needs expansion. Avoid cultural stereotypes or claims that one nationality always communicates a certain way.
4. Show two natural alternatives, such as a concise spoken version and a more explicit written version. Explain the tradeoff in each. Do not turn a request into an order, a possibility into a promise, or a pending decision into approval.
5. Ask me to respond to one realistic follow-up from the new reader, then wait. Finish by asking me to adapt the message for a second audience without losing its core meaning. Give feedback only after the attempt.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 08: Academic Presentations and Conferences
Original fictional case: An audience member asks whether a small study proves a general theory. The presenter needs a concise answer.
Language workshop: Match certainty to evidence
Communication goal: Separate observations, assumptions, and conclusions.
Language guidance: Say what the evidence shows, identify what is still unknown, and limit the conclusion to that evidence. Words such as 'may', 'suggests', and 'in this sample' are useful when the uncertainty is real. Do not soften an urgent, verified safety concern.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): The available evidence shows ... . / This may indicate ..., but ... . / We have not yet established whether ... .
Vocabulary: generalizability: The extent to which findings may apply beyond the people or conditions studied. / limitation: A condition that restricts what evidence, work, or a conclusion can establish. / future work: Further questions or activities proposed after the current study or project. / conference Q&A: The question-and-answer discussion associated with a conference presentation.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to tell a colleague what is known. Ask which part is confirmed and which part is an assumption. Challenge one statement that sounds more certain than the case supports.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: Someone asks for a yes-or-no answer when the evidence supports only a qualified answer. Be concise while preserving the uncertainty.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: The study offers evidence relevant to the theory under these conditions. It does not establish the theory in every setting. A useful next step would test whether the finding holds in a broader sample.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 08 · Academic Presentations and Conferences | Test recall and transfer

START PROMPT
TASK: A short retrieval session
1. Tell me to close my notes. Plan six questions: two vocabulary-in-context items, one grammar or meaning contrast, one question about a confirmed versus unknown detail, one short spoken-style response and one new-situation transfer task. Use the supplied material as the answer reference, but do not repeat its existing checks word for word.
2. Ask only the first question, then stop and wait. Prefer a short answer over a multiple-choice question. Do not display the remaining questions, model answers or a word bank in advance.
3. After each answer, say what it gets right and explain a meaningful error if there is one. Accept alternative wording when it preserves the facts and does the communication job. If I struggle, give one clue and invite a retry before revealing a model. Only then move to the next question.
4. Keep a simple record of which items I answered independently, with a hint, or after seeing a model. This records today's practice, not a certified proficiency score. Do not judge pronunciation from typed text.
5. At the end, summarize two strengths and two useful next steps with examples from my answers. Give me a small review card containing three prompts and a separate answer section. Suggest that I revisit it tomorrow and a week later; do not claim you will remember this session or send reminders. Label the final transfer scenario as fictional.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 08: Academic Presentations and Conferences
Original fictional case: An audience member asks whether a small study proves a general theory. The presenter needs a concise answer.
Language workshop: Match certainty to evidence
Communication goal: Separate observations, assumptions, and conclusions.
Language guidance: Say what the evidence shows, identify what is still unknown, and limit the conclusion to that evidence. Words such as 'may', 'suggests', and 'in this sample' are useful when the uncertainty is real. Do not soften an urgent, verified safety concern.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): The available evidence shows ... . / This may indicate ..., but ... . / We have not yet established whether ... .
Vocabulary: generalizability: The extent to which findings may apply beyond the people or conditions studied. / limitation: A condition that restricts what evidence, work, or a conclusion can establish. / future work: Further questions or activities proposed after the current study or project. / conference Q&A: The question-and-answer discussion associated with a conference presentation.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to tell a colleague what is known. Ask which part is confirmed and which part is an assumption. Challenge one statement that sounds more certain than the case supports.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: Someone asks for a yes-or-no answer when the evidence supports only a qualified answer. Be concise while preserving the uncertainty.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: The study offers evidence relevant to the theory under these conditions. It does not establish the theory in every setting. A useful next step would test whether the finding holds in a broader sample.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Lesson 08 · Academic Presentations and Conferences | Adapt a partner or class activity

START PROMPT
TASK: Adapt this material for a teaching session
1. Ask me one brief planning question covering learner support needs, group size and available time. Offer a default of two B2 learners and 20 minutes. Stop and wait; use the default only if I choose it.
2. Create a timed plan using the supplied case or dialogue, its actual terminology and one narrow language goal. Include an individual first attempt, partner exchange, focused feedback and a retry. Keep the total within the time I choose. State what the learner should be able to communicate at the end.
3. Provide separate role cards for two or three professional speakers. Each card needs an objective, known information and one question to resolve. Label any invented private information as a variation; do not contradict shared facts. Do not place the model answer on the learner cards.
4. Add a B1 support option with useful frames, a B2 independent task and a C1 extension involving a plausible competing constraint. Maintain the same professional meaning across levels. Explain unfamiliar terms without removing the field's normal language. Include a workable solo alternative.
5. Put teacher notes and suggested responses in a clearly separate section after the learner material. Include likely misunderstandings and a short observation checklist for facts, clarity, tone and next step. Accept multiple successful formulations. Finish with one exit question and a delayed-recall task; identify what the teacher should check before use.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Lesson 08: Academic Presentations and Conferences
Original fictional case: An audience member asks whether a small study proves a general theory. The presenter needs a concise answer.
Language workshop: Match certainty to evidence
Communication goal: Separate observations, assumptions, and conclusions.
Language guidance: Say what the evidence shows, identify what is still unknown, and limit the conclusion to that evidence. Words such as 'may', 'suggests', and 'in this sample' are useful when the uncertainty is real. Do not soften an urgent, verified safety concern.
Useful frames (complete the gaps with case facts): The available evidence shows ... . / This may indicate ..., but ... . / We have not yet established whether ... .
Vocabulary: generalizability: The extent to which findings may apply beyond the people or conditions studied. / limitation: A condition that restricts what evidence, work, or a conclusion can establish. / future work: Further questions or activities proposed after the current study or project. / conference Q&A: The question-and-answer discussion associated with a conference presentation.
Speaking task: Prepare for two minutes. Speak for 45-60 seconds using the case facts, then respond to your partner's question. Switch roles and repeat without reading the model response.
Partner: You need to tell a colleague what is known. Ask which part is confirmed and which part is an assumption. Challenge one statement that sounds more certain than the case supports.
Writing task: Write a 70-110 word message for the person who needs to act on this case. State the purpose, preserve the relevant facts, and make the next action or unresolved question clear. Use a subject line and an appropriate opening. Do not invent a deadline, finding, or approval.
Optional second-round challenge: Someone asks for a yes-or-no answer when the evidence supports only a qualified answer. Be concise while preserving the uncertainty.
Model for comparison AFTER my attempt, not a response to give me first: The study offers evidence relevant to the theory under these conditions. It does not establish the theory in every setting. A useful next step would test whether the finding holds in a broader sample.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Dialogue 01 · Study design discussion | Rehearse with an AI colleague

START PROMPT
TASK: Interactive workplace role-play
1. Use the supplied case or dialogue as the starting situation. Give a two-sentence briefing and offer two relevant professional roles for me to choose from. For a supplied dialogue, use its actual roles. Ask which role I want, then stop and wait. Do not write my replies.
2. After I choose, identify who you will play and the immediate communication goal. Play the other professional; where a meeting requires a third person, label each of your speakers clearly. Start with one natural workplace turn and wait for my reply. Keep most turns to one to three sentences and ask no more than one question at a time.
3. Let the exchange develop across six to ten learner turns, or end earlier if I type "feedback". Respond to what I actually say. Include a plausible clarification, disagreement or tradeoff without silently changing the starting facts. Mark any added constraint as a fictional second-round variation. Do not resolve approvals, evidence or commitments that remain uncertain.
4. Stay in role during the exchange. If my meaning is unclear, ask for clarification naturally. Give a hint only if I ask or cannot proceed. Do not deliver a model conversation in advance.
5. At the debrief, quote two of my phrases: one successful choice and one worth improving. Check factual accuracy, language, register and whether the next step was clear. Give up to three focused suggestions. Ask me to retry the weakest turn; wait. Only then offer an alternative wording and a harder replay.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Dialogue 01: Study design discussion
Original fictional setting: Researchers refine an overly broad question.
Professional roles: Principal investigator / Postdoctoral researcher
Published dialogue (reference script, not my own performance):
Principal investigator: Our question asks whether the program improves wellbeing. Which outcome and population do we mean?
Postdoctoral researcher: We should specify the target group, measurement instrument, and follow-up period.
Principal investigator: The available dataset may not cover the full period.
Postdoctoral researcher: Then either revise the feasible question or obtain suitable data; don't imply the design answers more than it can.
Principal investigator: I'll map the variables and missingness before we finalize the protocol.
Postdoctoral researcher: I'll review the design assumptions and proposed analysis with the team.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Dialogue 01 · Study design discussion | Create more scenario dialogues

START PROMPT
TASK: Extend the conversation library
1. Propose six distinct, common scenarios in this field beyond the supplied case or script. For each, name the setting, two or more professional roles, the communication problem and one useful terminology focus. Include routine coordination, clarification, a complication, disagreement, handoff and follow-up where relevant. Choose scenarios that fit this profession, rather than forcing unsuitable situations into it.
2. Ask me to choose one scenario, or request all six in sequence. Stop and wait. Do not write all the scripts before I choose.
3. For the selected scenario, write an original fictional dialogue of 12-18 substantial speaking turns between two or three professionals. Name each role, establish an actual work problem, and let the exchange progress through questions, clarification, competing constraints and a credible next step or explicitly unresolved issue. Use the occupation's natural nomenclature and register. Avoid an interview between a teacher and a learner, generic small talk, and inserting a glossary definition into every reply. Explain specialist terms outside the dialogue instead.
4. After the script, explain five useful expressions in context, identify two grammar or register choices and ask three questions about the speakers' reasoning. Withhold the answers until I attempt them. Add one role-switch challenge.
5. Before presenting a script, check names, numbers, chronology, roles and terminology for consistency. Label invented facts and acknowledge uncertain specialist usage. If I requested all six, deliver one complete script at a time and wait for "next". Make each scenario materially different.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Dialogue 01: Study design discussion
Original fictional setting: Researchers refine an overly broad question.
Professional roles: Principal investigator / Postdoctoral researcher
Published dialogue (reference script, not my own performance):
Principal investigator: Our question asks whether the program improves wellbeing. Which outcome and population do we mean?
Postdoctoral researcher: We should specify the target group, measurement instrument, and follow-up period.
Principal investigator: The available dataset may not cover the full period.
Postdoctoral researcher: Then either revise the feasible question or obtain suitable data; don't imply the design answers more than it can.
Principal investigator: I'll map the variables and missingness before we finalize the protocol.
Postdoctoral researcher: I'll review the design assumptions and proposed analysis with the team.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Dialogue 02 · Grant specific aims | Rehearse with an AI colleague

START PROMPT
TASK: Interactive workplace role-play
1. Use the supplied case or dialogue as the starting situation. Give a two-sentence briefing and offer two relevant professional roles for me to choose from. For a supplied dialogue, use its actual roles. Ask which role I want, then stop and wait. Do not write my replies.
2. After I choose, identify who you will play and the immediate communication goal. Play the other professional; where a meeting requires a third person, label each of your speakers clearly. Start with one natural workplace turn and wait for my reply. Keep most turns to one to three sentences and ask no more than one question at a time.
3. Let the exchange develop across six to ten learner turns, or end earlier if I type "feedback". Respond to what I actually say. Include a plausible clarification, disagreement or tradeoff without silently changing the starting facts. Mark any added constraint as a fictional second-round variation. Do not resolve approvals, evidence or commitments that remain uncertain.
4. Stay in role during the exchange. If my meaning is unclear, ask for clarification naturally. Give a hint only if I ask or cannot proceed. Do not deliver a model conversation in advance.
5. At the debrief, quote two of my phrases: one successful choice and one worth improving. Check factual accuracy, language, register and whether the next step was clear. Give up to three focused suggestions. Ask me to retry the weakest turn; wait. Only then offer an alternative wording and a harder replay.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Dialogue 02: Grant specific aims
Original fictional setting: A researcher and grants officer review a proposal.
Professional roles: Research lead / Grants officer
Published dialogue (reference script, not my own performance):
Research lead: Aim two depends entirely on a technique we haven't established. Is that too risky?
Grants officer: Reviewers need to understand the feasibility evidence and what happens if that method fails.
Research lead: We have pilot data, but only under one condition.
Grants officer: State that accurately and explain the alternative approach and decision points.
Research lead: I'll revise the milestones and connect the budget to the actual work.
Grants officer: I'll check the funder's requirements and the consistency of the aims, timeline, and resources.
Vocabulary in this exchange: feasibility: Whether a proposed activity can reasonably be carried out under stated conditions.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Dialogue 02 · Grant specific aims | Create more scenario dialogues

START PROMPT
TASK: Extend the conversation library
1. Propose six distinct, common scenarios in this field beyond the supplied case or script. For each, name the setting, two or more professional roles, the communication problem and one useful terminology focus. Include routine coordination, clarification, a complication, disagreement, handoff and follow-up where relevant. Choose scenarios that fit this profession, rather than forcing unsuitable situations into it.
2. Ask me to choose one scenario, or request all six in sequence. Stop and wait. Do not write all the scripts before I choose.
3. For the selected scenario, write an original fictional dialogue of 12-18 substantial speaking turns between two or three professionals. Name each role, establish an actual work problem, and let the exchange progress through questions, clarification, competing constraints and a credible next step or explicitly unresolved issue. Use the occupation's natural nomenclature and register. Avoid an interview between a teacher and a learner, generic small talk, and inserting a glossary definition into every reply. Explain specialist terms outside the dialogue instead.
4. After the script, explain five useful expressions in context, identify two grammar or register choices and ask three questions about the speakers' reasoning. Withhold the answers until I attempt them. Add one role-switch challenge.
5. Before presenting a script, check names, numbers, chronology, roles and terminology for consistency. Label invented facts and acknowledge uncertain specialist usage. If I requested all six, deliver one complete script at a time and wait for "next". Make each scenario materially different.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Dialogue 02: Grant specific aims
Original fictional setting: A researcher and grants officer review a proposal.
Professional roles: Research lead / Grants officer
Published dialogue (reference script, not my own performance):
Research lead: Aim two depends entirely on a technique we haven't established. Is that too risky?
Grants officer: Reviewers need to understand the feasibility evidence and what happens if that method fails.
Research lead: We have pilot data, but only under one condition.
Grants officer: State that accurately and explain the alternative approach and decision points.
Research lead: I'll revise the milestones and connect the budget to the actual work.
Grants officer: I'll check the funder's requirements and the consistency of the aims, timeline, and resources.
Vocabulary in this exchange: feasibility: Whether a proposed activity can reasonably be carried out under stated conditions.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Dialogue 03 · A result that did not reproduce | Rehearse with an AI colleague

START PROMPT
TASK: Interactive workplace role-play
1. Use the supplied case or dialogue as the starting situation. Give a two-sentence briefing and offer two relevant professional roles for me to choose from. For a supplied dialogue, use its actual roles. Ask which role I want, then stop and wait. Do not write my replies.
2. After I choose, identify who you will play and the immediate communication goal. Play the other professional; where a meeting requires a third person, label each of your speakers clearly. Start with one natural workplace turn and wait for my reply. Keep most turns to one to three sentences and ask no more than one question at a time.
3. Let the exchange develop across six to ten learner turns, or end earlier if I type "feedback". Respond to what I actually say. Include a plausible clarification, disagreement or tradeoff without silently changing the starting facts. Mark any added constraint as a fictional second-round variation. Do not resolve approvals, evidence or commitments that remain uncertain.
4. Stay in role during the exchange. If my meaning is unclear, ask for clarification naturally. Give a hint only if I ask or cannot proceed. Do not deliver a model conversation in advance.
5. At the debrief, quote two of my phrases: one successful choice and one worth improving. Check factual accuracy, language, register and whether the next step was clear. Give up to three focused suggestions. Ask me to retry the weakest turn; wait. Only then offer an alternative wording and a harder replay.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Dialogue 03: A result that did not reproduce
Original fictional setting: A lab discusses conflicting experimental runs.
Professional roles: Graduate researcher / Lab manager
Published dialogue (reference script, not my own performance):
Graduate researcher: The second run didn't reproduce the first result. Should I leave it out of the presentation until we know why?
Lab manager: Include it with the conditions and controls. The discrepancy is part of the evidence.
Graduate researcher: The reagent lot and incubation time differ between runs.
Lab manager: Record those differences without assuming either caused the result.
Graduate researcher: I'll show both datasets and propose the comparisons needed to investigate.
Lab manager: Preserve the raw files and agree on the next experiment before repeating the work.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Dialogue 03 · A result that did not reproduce | Create more scenario dialogues

START PROMPT
TASK: Extend the conversation library
1. Propose six distinct, common scenarios in this field beyond the supplied case or script. For each, name the setting, two or more professional roles, the communication problem and one useful terminology focus. Include routine coordination, clarification, a complication, disagreement, handoff and follow-up where relevant. Choose scenarios that fit this profession, rather than forcing unsuitable situations into it.
2. Ask me to choose one scenario, or request all six in sequence. Stop and wait. Do not write all the scripts before I choose.
3. For the selected scenario, write an original fictional dialogue of 12-18 substantial speaking turns between two or three professionals. Name each role, establish an actual work problem, and let the exchange progress through questions, clarification, competing constraints and a credible next step or explicitly unresolved issue. Use the occupation's natural nomenclature and register. Avoid an interview between a teacher and a learner, generic small talk, and inserting a glossary definition into every reply. Explain specialist terms outside the dialogue instead.
4. After the script, explain five useful expressions in context, identify two grammar or register choices and ask three questions about the speakers' reasoning. Withhold the answers until I attempt them. Add one role-switch challenge.
5. Before presenting a script, check names, numbers, chronology, roles and terminology for consistency. Label invented facts and acknowledge uncertain specialist usage. If I requested all six, deliver one complete script at a time and wait for "next". Make each scenario materially different.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Dialogue 03: A result that did not reproduce
Original fictional setting: A lab discusses conflicting experimental runs.
Professional roles: Graduate researcher / Lab manager
Published dialogue (reference script, not my own performance):
Graduate researcher: The second run didn't reproduce the first result. Should I leave it out of the presentation until we know why?
Lab manager: Include it with the conditions and controls. The discrepancy is part of the evidence.
Graduate researcher: The reagent lot and incubation time differ between runs.
Lab manager: Record those differences without assuming either caused the result.
Graduate researcher: I'll show both datasets and propose the comparisons needed to investigate.
Lab manager: Preserve the raw files and agree on the next experiment before repeating the work.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Dialogue 04 · Protocol amendment | Rehearse with an AI colleague

START PROMPT
TASK: Interactive workplace role-play
1. Use the supplied case or dialogue as the starting situation. Give a two-sentence briefing and offer two relevant professional roles for me to choose from. For a supplied dialogue, use its actual roles. Ask which role I want, then stop and wait. Do not write my replies.
2. After I choose, identify who you will play and the immediate communication goal. Play the other professional; where a meeting requires a third person, label each of your speakers clearly. Start with one natural workplace turn and wait for my reply. Keep most turns to one to three sentences and ask no more than one question at a time.
3. Let the exchange develop across six to ten learner turns, or end earlier if I type "feedback". Respond to what I actually say. Include a plausible clarification, disagreement or tradeoff without silently changing the starting facts. Mark any added constraint as a fictional second-round variation. Do not resolve approvals, evidence or commitments that remain uncertain.
4. Stay in role during the exchange. If my meaning is unclear, ask for clarification naturally. Give a hint only if I ask or cannot proceed. Do not deliver a model conversation in advance.
5. At the debrief, quote two of my phrases: one successful choice and one worth improving. Check factual accuracy, language, register and whether the next step was clear. Give up to three focused suggestions. Ask me to retry the weakest turn; wait. Only then offer an alternative wording and a harder replay.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Dialogue 04: Protocol amendment
Original fictional setting: A researcher proposes changing participant recruitment.
Professional roles: Research coordinator / Ethics coordinator
Published dialogue (reference script, not my own performance):
Research coordinator: Recruitment is slow. Could we broaden eligibility before the next session?
Ethics coordinator: Check whether the change requires prior ethics approval under the applicable process.
Research coordinator: We haven't amended the approved protocol yet.
Ethics coordinator: Then prepare the proposed change and its implications for consent, risk, and analysis for review.
Research coordinator: I'll keep recruitment within the approved criteria while that is assessed.
Ethics coordinator: I'll confirm the review route and communicate the decision once it is issued.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Dialogue 04 · Protocol amendment | Create more scenario dialogues

START PROMPT
TASK: Extend the conversation library
1. Propose six distinct, common scenarios in this field beyond the supplied case or script. For each, name the setting, two or more professional roles, the communication problem and one useful terminology focus. Include routine coordination, clarification, a complication, disagreement, handoff and follow-up where relevant. Choose scenarios that fit this profession, rather than forcing unsuitable situations into it.
2. Ask me to choose one scenario, or request all six in sequence. Stop and wait. Do not write all the scripts before I choose.
3. For the selected scenario, write an original fictional dialogue of 12-18 substantial speaking turns between two or three professionals. Name each role, establish an actual work problem, and let the exchange progress through questions, clarification, competing constraints and a credible next step or explicitly unresolved issue. Use the occupation's natural nomenclature and register. Avoid an interview between a teacher and a learner, generic small talk, and inserting a glossary definition into every reply. Explain specialist terms outside the dialogue instead.
4. After the script, explain five useful expressions in context, identify two grammar or register choices and ask three questions about the speakers' reasoning. Withhold the answers until I attempt them. Add one role-switch challenge.
5. Before presenting a script, check names, numbers, chronology, roles and terminology for consistency. Label invented facts and acknowledge uncertain specialist usage. If I requested all six, deliver one complete script at a time and wait for "next". Make each scenario materially different.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Dialogue 04: Protocol amendment
Original fictional setting: A researcher proposes changing participant recruitment.
Professional roles: Research coordinator / Ethics coordinator
Published dialogue (reference script, not my own performance):
Research coordinator: Recruitment is slow. Could we broaden eligibility before the next session?
Ethics coordinator: Check whether the change requires prior ethics approval under the applicable process.
Research coordinator: We haven't amended the approved protocol yet.
Ethics coordinator: Then prepare the proposed change and its implications for consent, risk, and analysis for review.
Research coordinator: I'll keep recruitment within the approved criteria while that is assessed.
Ethics coordinator: I'll confirm the review route and communicate the decision once it is issued.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Dialogue 05 · Authorship discussion | Rehearse with an AI colleague

START PROMPT
TASK: Interactive workplace role-play
1. Use the supplied case or dialogue as the starting situation. Give a two-sentence briefing and offer two relevant professional roles for me to choose from. For a supplied dialogue, use its actual roles. Ask which role I want, then stop and wait. Do not write my replies.
2. After I choose, identify who you will play and the immediate communication goal. Play the other professional; where a meeting requires a third person, label each of your speakers clearly. Start with one natural workplace turn and wait for my reply. Keep most turns to one to three sentences and ask no more than one question at a time.
3. Let the exchange develop across six to ten learner turns, or end earlier if I type "feedback". Respond to what I actually say. Include a plausible clarification, disagreement or tradeoff without silently changing the starting facts. Mark any added constraint as a fictional second-round variation. Do not resolve approvals, evidence or commitments that remain uncertain.
4. Stay in role during the exchange. If my meaning is unclear, ask for clarification naturally. Give a hint only if I ask or cannot proceed. Do not deliver a model conversation in advance.
5. At the debrief, quote two of my phrases: one successful choice and one worth improving. Check factual accuracy, language, register and whether the next step was clear. Give up to three focused suggestions. Ask me to retry the weakest turn; wait. Only then offer an alternative wording and a harder replay.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Dialogue 05: Authorship discussion
Original fictional setting: Collaborators clarify credit before submitting a paper.
Professional roles: Corresponding author / Collaborating researcher
Published dialogue (reference script, not my own performance):
Corresponding author: We haven't agreed on authorship order or contribution statements. Can we settle that before submission?
Collaborating researcher: Yes. Let's review actual contributions against the relevant journal and institutional criteria.
Corresponding author: One colleague provided resources but hasn't reviewed the manuscript.
Collaborating researcher: We should discuss their contribution and the requirements with them, rather than assume a position.
Corresponding author: I'll circulate a proposed contribution record for everyone's review.
Collaborating researcher: Make room for corrections and resolve disagreements before asking the team to approve submission.
Vocabulary in this exchange: authorship: Recognized responsibility and credit for creating a scholarly or other written work. / contribution: A person's or activity's part in producing a shared result.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Dialogue 05 · Authorship discussion | Create more scenario dialogues

START PROMPT
TASK: Extend the conversation library
1. Propose six distinct, common scenarios in this field beyond the supplied case or script. For each, name the setting, two or more professional roles, the communication problem and one useful terminology focus. Include routine coordination, clarification, a complication, disagreement, handoff and follow-up where relevant. Choose scenarios that fit this profession, rather than forcing unsuitable situations into it.
2. Ask me to choose one scenario, or request all six in sequence. Stop and wait. Do not write all the scripts before I choose.
3. For the selected scenario, write an original fictional dialogue of 12-18 substantial speaking turns between two or three professionals. Name each role, establish an actual work problem, and let the exchange progress through questions, clarification, competing constraints and a credible next step or explicitly unresolved issue. Use the occupation's natural nomenclature and register. Avoid an interview between a teacher and a learner, generic small talk, and inserting a glossary definition into every reply. Explain specialist terms outside the dialogue instead.
4. After the script, explain five useful expressions in context, identify two grammar or register choices and ask three questions about the speakers' reasoning. Withhold the answers until I attempt them. Add one role-switch challenge.
5. Before presenting a script, check names, numbers, chronology, roles and terminology for consistency. Label invented facts and acknowledge uncertain specialist usage. If I requested all six, deliver one complete script at a time and wait for "next". Make each scenario materially different.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Dialogue 05: Authorship discussion
Original fictional setting: Collaborators clarify credit before submitting a paper.
Professional roles: Corresponding author / Collaborating researcher
Published dialogue (reference script, not my own performance):
Corresponding author: We haven't agreed on authorship order or contribution statements. Can we settle that before submission?
Collaborating researcher: Yes. Let's review actual contributions against the relevant journal and institutional criteria.
Corresponding author: One colleague provided resources but hasn't reviewed the manuscript.
Collaborating researcher: We should discuss their contribution and the requirements with them, rather than assume a position.
Corresponding author: I'll circulate a proposed contribution record for everyone's review.
Collaborating researcher: Make room for corrections and resolve disagreements before asking the team to approve submission.
Vocabulary in this exchange: authorship: Recognized responsibility and credit for creating a scholarly or other written work. / contribution: A person's or activity's part in producing a shared result.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Dialogue 06 · Responding to peer review | Rehearse with an AI colleague

START PROMPT
TASK: Interactive workplace role-play
1. Use the supplied case or dialogue as the starting situation. Give a two-sentence briefing and offer two relevant professional roles for me to choose from. For a supplied dialogue, use its actual roles. Ask which role I want, then stop and wait. Do not write my replies.
2. After I choose, identify who you will play and the immediate communication goal. Play the other professional; where a meeting requires a third person, label each of your speakers clearly. Start with one natural workplace turn and wait for my reply. Keep most turns to one to three sentences and ask no more than one question at a time.
3. Let the exchange develop across six to ten learner turns, or end earlier if I type "feedback". Respond to what I actually say. Include a plausible clarification, disagreement or tradeoff without silently changing the starting facts. Mark any added constraint as a fictional second-round variation. Do not resolve approvals, evidence or commitments that remain uncertain.
4. Stay in role during the exchange. If my meaning is unclear, ask for clarification naturally. Give a hint only if I ask or cannot proceed. Do not deliver a model conversation in advance.
5. At the debrief, quote two of my phrases: one successful choice and one worth improving. Check factual accuracy, language, register and whether the next step was clear. Give up to three focused suggestions. Ask me to retry the weakest turn; wait. Only then offer an alternative wording and a harder replay.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Dialogue 06: Responding to peer review
Original fictional setting: Two authors plan a response to a critical reviewer.
Professional roles: Lead author / Coauthor
Published dialogue (reference script, not my own performance):
Lead author: The reviewer asks for a causal claim we can't support with this design.
Coauthor: Explain the limitation respectfully and revise any wording that overstates the result.
Lead author: We can add a sensitivity analysis, but it won't turn the study into an experiment.
Coauthor: Say what that analysis addresses and what it doesn't.
Lead author: I'll quote the relevant comment and give a point-by-point response with manuscript locations.
Coauthor: I'll check that each claimed revision is actually present in the new version.
Vocabulary in this exchange: limitation: A condition that restricts what evidence, work, or a conclusion can establish.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Dialogue 06 · Responding to peer review | Create more scenario dialogues

START PROMPT
TASK: Extend the conversation library
1. Propose six distinct, common scenarios in this field beyond the supplied case or script. For each, name the setting, two or more professional roles, the communication problem and one useful terminology focus. Include routine coordination, clarification, a complication, disagreement, handoff and follow-up where relevant. Choose scenarios that fit this profession, rather than forcing unsuitable situations into it.
2. Ask me to choose one scenario, or request all six in sequence. Stop and wait. Do not write all the scripts before I choose.
3. For the selected scenario, write an original fictional dialogue of 12-18 substantial speaking turns between two or three professionals. Name each role, establish an actual work problem, and let the exchange progress through questions, clarification, competing constraints and a credible next step or explicitly unresolved issue. Use the occupation's natural nomenclature and register. Avoid an interview between a teacher and a learner, generic small talk, and inserting a glossary definition into every reply. Explain specialist terms outside the dialogue instead.
4. After the script, explain five useful expressions in context, identify two grammar or register choices and ask three questions about the speakers' reasoning. Withhold the answers until I attempt them. Add one role-switch challenge.
5. Before presenting a script, check names, numbers, chronology, roles and terminology for consistency. Label invented facts and acknowledge uncertain specialist usage. If I requested all six, deliver one complete script at a time and wait for "next". Make each scenario materially different.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Dialogue 06: Responding to peer review
Original fictional setting: Two authors plan a response to a critical reviewer.
Professional roles: Lead author / Coauthor
Published dialogue (reference script, not my own performance):
Lead author: The reviewer asks for a causal claim we can't support with this design.
Coauthor: Explain the limitation respectfully and revise any wording that overstates the result.
Lead author: We can add a sensitivity analysis, but it won't turn the study into an experiment.
Coauthor: Say what that analysis addresses and what it doesn't.
Lead author: I'll quote the relevant comment and give a point-by-point response with manuscript locations.
Coauthor: I'll check that each claimed revision is actually present in the new version.
Vocabulary in this exchange: limitation: A condition that restricts what evidence, work, or a conclusion can establish.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Dialogue 07 · Reproducible analysis handoff | Rehearse with an AI colleague

START PROMPT
TASK: Interactive workplace role-play
1. Use the supplied case or dialogue as the starting situation. Give a two-sentence briefing and offer two relevant professional roles for me to choose from. For a supplied dialogue, use its actual roles. Ask which role I want, then stop and wait. Do not write my replies.
2. After I choose, identify who you will play and the immediate communication goal. Play the other professional; where a meeting requires a third person, label each of your speakers clearly. Start with one natural workplace turn and wait for my reply. Keep most turns to one to three sentences and ask no more than one question at a time.
3. Let the exchange develop across six to ten learner turns, or end earlier if I type "feedback". Respond to what I actually say. Include a plausible clarification, disagreement or tradeoff without silently changing the starting facts. Mark any added constraint as a fictional second-round variation. Do not resolve approvals, evidence or commitments that remain uncertain.
4. Stay in role during the exchange. If my meaning is unclear, ask for clarification naturally. Give a hint only if I ask or cannot proceed. Do not deliver a model conversation in advance.
5. At the debrief, quote two of my phrases: one successful choice and one worth improving. Check factual accuracy, language, register and whether the next step was clear. Give up to three focused suggestions. Ask me to retry the weakest turn; wait. Only then offer an alternative wording and a harder replay.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Dialogue 07: Reproducible analysis handoff
Original fictional setting: A researcher transfers an analysis to a colleague.
Professional roles: Data analyst / Research associate
Published dialogue (reference script, not my own performance):
Data analyst: The notebook runs on my laptop, but it relies on files in my downloads folder.
Research associate: We need documented inputs, environment details, and a reproducible project structure.
Data analyst: Some source data have sharing restrictions.
Research associate: Keep those restrictions intact. Document how authorized users obtain the data and include permissible test data where appropriate.
Data analyst: I'll record package versions and the exact analysis steps.
Research associate: I'll attempt a clean run and report any missing dependencies or unclear transformations.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Dialogue 07 · Reproducible analysis handoff | Create more scenario dialogues

START PROMPT
TASK: Extend the conversation library
1. Propose six distinct, common scenarios in this field beyond the supplied case or script. For each, name the setting, two or more professional roles, the communication problem and one useful terminology focus. Include routine coordination, clarification, a complication, disagreement, handoff and follow-up where relevant. Choose scenarios that fit this profession, rather than forcing unsuitable situations into it.
2. Ask me to choose one scenario, or request all six in sequence. Stop and wait. Do not write all the scripts before I choose.
3. For the selected scenario, write an original fictional dialogue of 12-18 substantial speaking turns between two or three professionals. Name each role, establish an actual work problem, and let the exchange progress through questions, clarification, competing constraints and a credible next step or explicitly unresolved issue. Use the occupation's natural nomenclature and register. Avoid an interview between a teacher and a learner, generic small talk, and inserting a glossary definition into every reply. Explain specialist terms outside the dialogue instead.
4. After the script, explain five useful expressions in context, identify two grammar or register choices and ask three questions about the speakers' reasoning. Withhold the answers until I attempt them. Add one role-switch challenge.
5. Before presenting a script, check names, numbers, chronology, roles and terminology for consistency. Label invented facts and acknowledge uncertain specialist usage. If I requested all six, deliver one complete script at a time and wait for "next". Make each scenario materially different.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Dialogue 07: Reproducible analysis handoff
Original fictional setting: A researcher transfers an analysis to a colleague.
Professional roles: Data analyst / Research associate
Published dialogue (reference script, not my own performance):
Data analyst: The notebook runs on my laptop, but it relies on files in my downloads folder.
Research associate: We need documented inputs, environment details, and a reproducible project structure.
Data analyst: Some source data have sharing restrictions.
Research associate: Keep those restrictions intact. Document how authorized users obtain the data and include permissible test data where appropriate.
Data analyst: I'll record package versions and the exact analysis steps.
Research associate: I'll attempt a clean run and report any missing dependencies or unclear transformations.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Dialogue 08 · Conference questions | Rehearse with an AI colleague

START PROMPT
TASK: Interactive workplace role-play
1. Use the supplied case or dialogue as the starting situation. Give a two-sentence briefing and offer two relevant professional roles for me to choose from. For a supplied dialogue, use its actual roles. Ask which role I want, then stop and wait. Do not write my replies.
2. After I choose, identify who you will play and the immediate communication goal. Play the other professional; where a meeting requires a third person, label each of your speakers clearly. Start with one natural workplace turn and wait for my reply. Keep most turns to one to three sentences and ask no more than one question at a time.
3. Let the exchange develop across six to ten learner turns, or end earlier if I type "feedback". Respond to what I actually say. Include a plausible clarification, disagreement or tradeoff without silently changing the starting facts. Mark any added constraint as a fictional second-round variation. Do not resolve approvals, evidence or commitments that remain uncertain.
4. Stay in role during the exchange. If my meaning is unclear, ask for clarification naturally. Give a hint only if I ask or cannot proceed. Do not deliver a model conversation in advance.
5. At the debrief, quote two of my phrases: one successful choice and one worth improving. Check factual accuracy, language, register and whether the next step was clear. Give up to three focused suggestions. Ask me to retry the weakest turn; wait. Only then offer an alternative wording and a harder replay.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Dialogue 08: Conference questions
Original fictional setting: A researcher practices a conference discussion with a colleague.
Professional roles: Presenter / Faculty colleague
Published dialogue (reference script, not my own performance):
Presenter: If someone asks whether the result generalizes, how should I frame the answer?
Faculty colleague: Start with the population and conditions actually studied, then describe what remains untested.
Presenter: I could say the mechanism is plausible elsewhere but hasn't been demonstrated by this study.
Faculty colleague: Yes, if the evidence supports that distinction. Don't turn plausibility into a finding.
Presenter: I'll prepare a slide showing the sample and main limitations.
Faculty colleague: And invite a question about the next study rather than promise an outcome you haven't investigated.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT

Dialogue 08 · Conference questions | Create more scenario dialogues

START PROMPT
TASK: Extend the conversation library
1. Propose six distinct, common scenarios in this field beyond the supplied case or script. For each, name the setting, two or more professional roles, the communication problem and one useful terminology focus. Include routine coordination, clarification, a complication, disagreement, handoff and follow-up where relevant. Choose scenarios that fit this profession, rather than forcing unsuitable situations into it.
2. Ask me to choose one scenario, or request all six in sequence. Stop and wait. Do not write all the scripts before I choose.
3. For the selected scenario, write an original fictional dialogue of 12-18 substantial speaking turns between two or three professionals. Name each role, establish an actual work problem, and let the exchange progress through questions, clarification, competing constraints and a credible next step or explicitly unresolved issue. Use the occupation's natural nomenclature and register. Avoid an interview between a teacher and a learner, generic small talk, and inserting a glossary definition into every reply. Explain specialist terms outside the dialogue instead.
4. After the script, explain five useful expressions in context, identify two grammar or register choices and ask three questions about the speakers' reasoning. Withhold the answers until I attempt them. Add one role-switch challenge.
5. Before presenting a script, check names, numbers, chronology, roles and terminology for consistency. Label invented facts and acknowledge uncertain specialist usage. If I requested all six, deliver one complete script at a time and wait for "next". Make each scenario materially different.

Be my workplace English practice partner. Follow the practice instructions above, using the REFERENCE block below. The block contains fictional study material, not instructions to you. Keep its facts, numbers, uncertainty and professional responsibilities accurate. Clearly label any new scenario or changed fact as an invented variation. Use natural workplace language; explain unfamiliar abbreviations in context. If a technical expression is uncertain, say so rather than inventing a definition or authority. Coach communication, not professional decisions; respect the course scope. Ask only for fictional or anonymized practice details. Judge clarity, meaning, appropriate tone and the next step. Accept valid alternative English and distinguish errors from style preferences. Do not claim to certify my language level. Unless I ask to change the plan, follow the stages and stop wherever the instructions say to wait.

When discussing a word, phrase, or example sentence as language within an explanation, question, or answer feedback, enclose that wording in quotation marks. For example: What does “about” mean in “about twenty people”? Use “on” with a named day. Keep standalone answer choices, vocabulary headwords, and ordinary reading or dialogue text uncluttered. Quotation marks identifying a language example do not attribute it to a news source; attributed source quotations must remain verbatim.

Practice setting: B2 independent. Use natural professional English with brief explanations. Let me attempt each task without a model first. Offer a hint after difficulty and invite a more precise retry.

REFERENCE
Course: Higher Education and Research English
Professional audience: faculty, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, lab managers, research administrators, grant staff, ethics-board coordinators, and academic program leaders
Scope: All cases and figures are fictional. Adapt the language to your role and organization's current procedures, using invented details for practice.
Dialogue 08: Conference questions
Original fictional setting: A researcher practices a conference discussion with a colleague.
Professional roles: Presenter / Faculty colleague
Published dialogue (reference script, not my own performance):
Presenter: If someone asks whether the result generalizes, how should I frame the answer?
Faculty colleague: Start with the population and conditions actually studied, then describe what remains untested.
Presenter: I could say the mechanism is plausible elsewhere but hasn't been demonstrated by this study.
Faculty colleague: Yes, if the evidence supports that distinction. Don't turn plausibility into a finding.
Presenter: I'll prepare a slide showing the sample and main limitations.
Faculty colleague: And invite a question about the next study rather than promise an outcome you haven't investigated.
END REFERENCE
END PROMPT